I hate Fiefeld SO much.

[Scorpio]

The filmmakers disagree with you.

They do?  Alright, well that's settled then.

[bb-15]

It's obvious he panicked.  Doesn't change the fact he had a map.

Of course Fifield had a map.
But as I quoted;
- "the pilots of Northwest Airlines flight 188 became distracted ... they overflew their Minneapolis destination by 150 miles."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/23/northwest-pilots-argument-miss-runway
- "a Southwest Airlines jet with 124 passengers landed at the wrong airport,"
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/travel/southwest-plane-wrong-airport/

The pilots in those planes had sophisticated instruments which included maps.
* Still, all the instruments in those situations didn't matter because the pilots made serious errors in judgement.
One example involved stress which relates to what happened to Fifield in "Prometheus".

* Looking at Alien films; Imo there is also 'dumb' behavior by experts in those movies.
- For instance in "Alien", science officer Ash should not have let Kane, who had a fast growing, foot long (1/3 meter) parasite in his chest, eat with the crew. From basic medical science it's a very bad idea.
- "Alien: Resurrection" where a scientist should not have put 3 xenomorphs in the same cell together, with their razor sharp teeth and acid blood which can quickly burn through any substance created by humans. Terrible experiment design.   

- But in horror movies, even expert characters sometimes need to do 'dumb' things to move the story along.

Millburn had some sort of GPS tracking too.

In "Prometheus" it is shown that Fifield is the one navigating in the tunnels while Milburn follows.
In our world when there is an exploration team, there is often a team leader who leads others with exploring / navigating.

It's dumb that a guy who wanted to leave ASAP didn't consult his map at some point.

- I think Fifield probably looked at the map but in his stressed out state he didn't properly act on it; something like, he took the wrong turn.

- Back to non fiction.
Even experts in navigation with maps can do 'dumb' things as I've shown in previous quotes / links that I've posted. 
- This kind of 'Dumb' behavior by experts in our world can exist. It's plausible.

* 'Dumb' expert behavior can involve other things.
Like walking on the Moon (a skill which would receive lots of training) where a geologist astronaut got excited (Harrison "Jack" Schmitt) and fell multiple times.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gM140g0zsQc

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjOnsbodCus

[Biomechanoid]

BB-15: "Even experts in navigation with maps can do 'dumb' things as I've shown in previous quotes / links that I've posted. "

I remember BB-15 clear back when he was BB-8. Okay bad joke aside, it's not unusual that some film viewers expect flawless behavior from certain characters. For some viewers, idiotic behavior/judgement of real people, well that is simply not allowed for fictional characters, and in some strange way, they actually attribute that to bad writing. Which seems odd to me, they want the writer to abandon realism, such as the real world examples you provide, and write the character as a professional with flawless judgment.

Not everyone, but some viewers I see chant, "I prefer realism," I wonder if they really mean, "I prefer MY realism."

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

* Looking at Alien films; Imo there is also 'dumb' behavior by experts in those movies.
- For instance in "Alien", science officer Ash should not have let Kane, who had a fast growing, foot long (1/3 meter) parasite in his chest, eat with the crew. From basic medical science it's a very bad idea.

Wut? 

Ash was under orders to bring back the "organism", the crew were considered "expendable". He didn't give a f**k about them. How exactly is that "dumb" behavior?

[SM]

Beat me to it.

Possibly the worst example of whataboutery imaginable.

In "Prometheus" it is shown that Fifield is the one navigating in the tunnels while Milburn follows.
In our world when there is an exploration team, there is often a team leader who leads others with exploring / navigating.

Irrelevant.  Millburn reads his position off to Janek over the radio.

What's more confusing is that two guys who were really eager to leave end up at the centre of the pyramid when they could've asked Janek for directions to wait near the exit for pickup after the storm breaks.

I can forgive a lot of questionable character decisions in movies 'cos I'd rather enjoy them than needlessly nitpick.  But some things are just dodgy and contrived and too difficult to justify.

[Paranoid Android]

I remember BB-15 clear back when he was BB-8. Okay bad joke aside, it's not unusual that some film viewers expect flawless behavior from certain characters. For some viewers, idiotic behavior/judgement of real people, well that is simply not allowed for fictional characters, and in some strange way, they actually attribute that to bad writing. Which seems odd to me, they want the writer to abandon realism, such as the real world examples you provide, and write the character as a professional with flawless judgment.

Characters can (and are even encouraged to) make mistakes in stories. That's what makes stories interesting in the first place. That said, mistakes need to be set up in the story as either a character flaw, or some logical external reason that caused them. If it is not set up, it is indeed bad writing.

The examples bb-15 provides don't apply because all of his examples are of people who make mistakes in their fields of expertise, not of people who fail to even have an expertise. Everybody makes mistakes. That said, Fifield doesn't only fail to demonstrate his expertise, he gets outclassed in his supposed field of expertise by every single character in the film (even characters who stayed on the ship). To put this into perspective, take bb-15's first example of Flight 188 missing its destination by 150 miles (which is more of a sensationalist headline, as 150 miles aren't that much for a plane): To compare that example to how Fifield operates in Prometheus, you'd need to give every single passenger on board their own plane, then have every single one of them land their planes in the correct destination, while the pilots of Flight 188 crash their plane into the ground because they don't even  know how to fly a plane and "all the buttons are the same to them".

[Scorpio]

Everybody here is missing the point.

Few beings have ever been so impregnated, pierced to the core, by the conviction of the absolute futility of human aspiration. The universe is nothing but a furtive arrangement of elementary particles. A figure in transition toward chaos. That is what will finally prevail. The human race will disappear. Other races in turn will appear and disappear. The skies will be glacial and empty, transversed by the feeble light of half-dead stars. These too will disappear. Everything will disappear. And human actions are as free and as stripped of meaning as the unfettered movement of the elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, sentiments? Pure "Victorian fictions." All that exists is egotism. Cold, intact, and radiant.

HP Lovecraft

Ridley Scott's Alien is a dark, dystopian vision of humanity.  This isn't Star Trek which is utopian fantasy.

More in line with Lovecraft like the original Alien.

I posted this before but I'll post this again, it explains it well:

[asil]

I love Fifield. His story is interesting.

He tried so hard to make sense around him, end up he's the first xeno character of Alien universe.

[whiterabbit]

Educated people who do stupid things are real. So I fail to see the problem with all of the idiots in Prometheus.

[Olde]

I love Fifield. His story is interesting.

Aside from smoking in his spacesuit and that one hilarious quote and delivery ("I like rocks...I LOVE rocks!"), he was more or less an Everyman, a good frame of reference character for the audience. That fact that he had didn't even try to hide his disdain for others around him made him much more relatable to me than any of the other characters.

[HuDaFuK]

Educated people who do stupid things are real. So I fail to see the problem with all of the idiots in Prometheus.

Sure.

The issue is believability. And clearly a lot of people couldn't believe how immensely stupid Fifield was.

[Biomechanoid]

Characters can (and are even encouraged to) make mistakes in stories. That's what makes stories interesting in the first place. That said, mistakes need to be set up in the story as either a character flaw, or some logical external reason that caused them. If it is not set up, it is indeed bad writing.

....and, hence my comment....Not everyone, but some viewers I see chant, "I prefer realism," I wonder if they really mean, "I prefer MY realism."

Your description above is a good example "Mistakes need to be set up," that some have their own perception of realism. Who made the rule mistakes need to be set up? Real world, is there an explanatory set up for mistakes about to happen, created by real people? Mishaps in real world are often received as "WTF?" Not necessarily bad writing, there's always the doubt of personal perception of realism is in play.

As for BB-15's examples you address, perhaps more appropriate I don't speak on behalf of BB-15, so I  will leave him the mic if he decides to bring forth a counterpoint.

[bb-15]

For some viewers, idiotic behavior/judgement of real people, well that is simply not allowed for fictional characters, and in some strange way, they actually attribute that to bad writing. Which seems odd to me, they want the writer to abandon realism, such as the real world examples you provide, and write the character as a professional with flawless judgment.

Not everyone, but some viewers I see chant, "I prefer realism," I wonder if they really mean, "I prefer MY realism."

The thought process described was advocated by Roger Ebert as the only way to do film criticism.
1. Begin with a gut feeling. 2. Then try to rationalize why that gut feeling is right.

(This is the way most people I've interacted with approach movie reviews which I accept. After all no rating process of a film is objectively wrong. I'm just sharing my view about movie criticism which can include looking at similar behavior in our world.)

****************

Wut? 

Ash was under orders to bring back the "organism", the crew were considered "expendable". He didn't give a f**k about them. How exactly is that "dumb" behavior?

Imo this is a common misinterpretation of Special Order 937 which states;

"Priority one — Ensure return of organism for analysis. All other considerations secondary. Crew expendable."

- Priority one is to get the organism back to the lab near/on earth.
- Killing a crew member (like Kane) to get the organism into the ship follows priority one. (The organism needs to be in the ship for it to be transported back to a lab near or on earth.)
- Once the creature is on board (inside of Kane), then killing the crew could sabotage getting the creature back to the lab near/on earth. That would violate priority one. After all, in "Alien" the creature does not get to the lab. The mission was a failure.
- How to avoid priority one failure?
Put Kane (who has the creature inside of him) in stasis in an isolated med room (quarantine) in sick bay.
Parker suggested putting Kane into stasis.
It's clearly a reasonable idea.
- Instead Ash lets Kane, who had a fast growing, foot long (1/3 meter) parasite in his chest, eat with the crew.
That risks parasite escape and contaminating the crew.
This basic ignoring of medical science by Ash puts in jeopardy completing priority one & Special Order 937.
- Again, the Nostromo does not reach earth. That = failure of Special Order 937 which could have been avoided by Ash. 

* But I have an answer to this story issue.
Imo Ash eventually didn't care about Special Order 937 with its priority one (based on his perfect organism speech).
To me as he saw the baby chestburster grow in sick bay, he because obsessed with it.
Ash wanted the creature to grow and take over the ship.
He began to almost worship this 'perfect organism' and letting it run free and kill became his top priority.

**************

Possibly the worst example of whataboutery imaginable.

LOL!

Irrelevant.  Millburn reads his position off to Janek over the radio.

Not in the crucial few minutes (less than 15) when Fifield is leading Milburn and they are getting lost.
At that time Fifield/Milburn don't contact Janek because they haven't yet realized they are lost. 

- In the film once the storm is identified by Chance/Janek there is less than 15 minutes that Fifield/Milburn could do anything to get back to the ship.

- Vickers said;

Vickers: I'll be closing the outer doors in fifteen minutes

- What's important here is that Shaw (& her group) got to the vehicles and arrived at the ship in 15 minutes.
Therefore she got to the vehicles in less than 15 minutes; maybe 13 or 14 minutes.
- In those crucial ~13 minutes an agitated Fifield is leading Milburn (as shown in the film).
Once the rest of the away team left with the vehicles, it didn't matter what Milburn did.
He and Fifield couldn't return because of the storm as also discussed in the movie.

What's more confusing is that two guys who were really eager to leave end up at the centre of the pyramid when they could've asked Janek for directions to wait near the exit for pickup after the storm breaks.

I don't see it as confusing at all.
- Fifield at first leads Milburn into the tunnels and he soon takes the wrong turn.
I've already explained how such behavior by navigation experts exists in our world.
- When Janek radios the away team to get back to the ship, as I've explained, Fifield had already taken the wrong turn.
He didn't get back to the vehicles or see the rest of the away team in the tunnels.
- By the time Fifield and Milburn realized the mistake after those crucial 15 minutes, they were in contact with Janek but it was too late.

I can forgive a lot of questionable character decisions in movies 'cos I'd rather enjoy them than needlessly nitpick.  But some things are just dodgy and contrived and too difficult to justify.

- I fully accept your personal taste and approach to reviewing / rating this part of this film.
- I just happen to have a different approach compared with you and most people I've seen on internet movie review threads.
My method includes trying to give well made science fiction films a chance and that includes looking for examples of similar behavior in our our world.

I'm most willing to agree to disagree about this.

****************

that said, mistakes need to be set up in the story as either a character flaw, or some logical external reason that caused them. If it is not set up,

Sorry but it is set up.
Fifield clearly has anger issues. And anger, yelling, & stress can interfere with a person's functioning. 

not of people who fail to even have an expertise. ... Fifield doesn't only fail to demonstrate his expertise, he gets outclassed in his supposed field of expertise by every single character in the film

No. Fifleld does things such as using the PUPS and seeing the structure of the dome/pyramid which no other away team member can do.
And in the beginning of the mission to the dome/pyramid Fifield is the lead navigator of the away team.
All that is evidence of competence/expertise.

But when Fifield saw the dead Engineer, his stress went up a lot and his abilities took a drastic negative turn. 

*****************

Educated people who do stupid things are real. So I fail to see the problem with all of the idiots in Prometheus.

Agreed. When educated / experts are under stress and they have a short time limit, they can sometimes do very wrong things.
- And one of my views about films is, if a behavior exists in our world, it can be put into a movie.

******************

The issue is believability. And clearly a lot of people couldn't believe how immensely stupid Fifield was.

Excellent point.
What I'd add is that in my experience what is believable for most film viewers has to do with their gut reaction to a movie.
For the majority of members in film forums that I've seen, what is stupid isn't a question of facts + logic.
It has to do with seeing a scene and concluding; that was awful.

On IMDb a long time member named Angry James (great name) who had years of debates with me explained it very well.
Angry James wrote that the faster than light travel in "Prometheus" was terrible and unbelievable.
- I replied to AJ as I usually do with a page full of franchise information about FTL travel.
- Angry James responded that with his film reviews franchise facts didn't matter.
His gut reaction was all that mattered to him.

* So, I understand that I am an outlier in this debate with my multiple quotes about navigation experts in our world getting lost.
For most movie viewers that I've interacted with, that kind of information doesn't matter.

[Biomechanoid]

I don't recall seeing Angry James in the imdb 2001 aso forum where you and I set up tents, but his name rings a bell. Was he a frequent poster in imdb's Prometheus forum? I didn't go there a whole lot because for months it was embroiled in chaos.

[bb-15]

I don't recall seeing Angry James in the imdb 2001 aso forum where you and I set up tents, but his name rings a bell. Was he a frequent poster in imdb's Prometheus forum? I didn't go there a whole lot because for months it was embroiled in chaos.

Yeah, Angry James was a longtime regular on the "Prometheus" IMDb board. He was the easiest for me to communicate with of those in the hate the film camp.

As for the IMDb forums overall, most of the boards for major movies were in chaos (with spamming, insults).
Even the IMDb "2001" board, which had a knowledgeable community, had some people secretly deleting comments and some trolling.

Since the end of the IMDb forums, I've been on several of the film discussion successors and imo there is nothing like the level of the "2001" IMDb community on those new sites. (Or like other solid IMDb communities such as for Lord of the Rings or Blade Runner which are now lost.)

** This is why of all the science fiction movie forum choices now on the web, I'd much rather be on this site.
- I'm very impressed by the regulars on AVPGalaxy.
- It doesn't matter if some people here disagree with me. (Debate is part of life.)
This site has well informed members who often make many thoughtful comments.
The discussions are mostly enjoyable and informative.
The site is also well moderated which I very much appreciate.