Exclusive: New Prometheus Trailer Footage

[cmdcnqr]

prometheus-movie.com HAS THE OFFICIAL TRAILER READY TO LAUNCH... SORT OF.  Just checked it out, looks super-official, and just has COMING SOON.

The trailer is about to arrive, and in HD

WOO HOO

-Wilmer B.

[JaaayDee]

Are you sure you aren't hating on CGI just for the sake of hating new things?

[Tough little S.O.B.]

I agree...when the trailer actually hits its gonna blow all to hell, in a good way. This is deliberate viral marketing.

We've had two trailers...one was a small bit, and the latest, just a bit more. If we look at how the information to Prometheus has come to us, it makes good sense. First a leak of the ComiCon footage in the form of stills...and then, set photos, a steady stream of them until the first clip, and then nearly a full blown trailer. This is entirely on purpose, and I'm betting Fox is absolutely behind this. Ridley was an ad man first, he knows marketing, and Fox knows that they have to sell this film, and sell it well.

Looks like all its planned yes....

If not, it means that the guy who filmed the trailer on the computer is one of the biggest idiots ever....

Are you sure you aren't hating on CGI just for the sake of hating new things?

Of course my age (34) maybe plays againts it, but its undeniable that under the CGI flag, some of the most terrible and insulting crimes against cinema have been commited.

I love a lot of movies with CGI actually.

The new Star Trek has lots of it, but it´s not filled with funny creatures that look like a damm cartoon.

I love how Robert Zemeckis uses it and you can´t hardly even apreciate it.

Fincher and Nolan use it really wisely!

The new planets of the apes is quite impresive with the facial gestures of Caesar, but the overall movements of the apes and the scenarios etc. look, again,  just like a cartoon.  (and the movie is quite boring also).

T-2 FX are Amazing. The liquid metal thing is so basic that it fits perfectly with CGI.

Jurasic one is AMAZING. But they don´t use it for close shots.

Starship Troppers are great. The monsters don´t have funny faces or look like a cartoon.

But then, you have things like AVATAR: Its a cartoon movie. I can not feel any sense of reality there. If they wanted to make it 100% CGI, then do it, like TINTIN, but dont mix real people there because Its no beliable.

Lord Of the Rings: Horrible, horible horrible. Al creatures have cartoon faces. I never hated any character as much as I hated gollum since Jar Jar.

Sam Raimi use of CGI is just horrible. He thinks that as far as its on the screen, whatever it is, you are going to believe it.

The new star wars, just an insult and a spit in the face.

You people seen THE MIST? What the f**k was that! they did the CGI with a Commodore 64?

Also, CGI has open the door to all that horrible and disgustin SCI FI TV Shows...

But The worst thing about CGI, is that people seems to love them so much, that you just have to fill a movie with them, and forget about any plot, character deepness, etc. and people will love it.

There are (few) movies where CGI is CRAP but the movie is great because the director has RESPECT for the audience, but the poor guy maybe hadn´t enough money for practical efects or nice CGI, or maybe they just dont give a shit.

It also helped making better TV SHows. Lost had some horrible CGI but the writing was so good that you just dont care (too much).

At the end, for me, is all a matter of having RESPECT for the audience, and nowadays, 99% of directors,studios, writers etc. don´t have it.

Don´t know, maybe as I sayd Is just the age and I am less tolerant to CGI than others.

[Xenomorphine]

sooooo.....how about them space jockeys??

They're busy playing a cosmic game of Hungry, Hungry Hippos.

DO NOT DISTURB.

I think that's why the idea works... what in the heck would it evolve into?

Something still very much of a predator, is my thinking.

It's this kind of mystery (and shameless speculation) that makes the O'Bannon/Giger/Scott universe so much fun, and why the mind boggles at where Prometheus will take us.

I agree that exploring the mysterious consequences of what the derelict means could be incredibly epic. Quite possibly one of the few things which could properly rescue the franchise back to the levels of anticipation it had through the eighties.

We can only hope that the final product measures up with expectations.

Wasn't alive in '86

Damn, I feel old now...

I love Lovecraft and his worls of crazy gods, but I´m afraid in prometheus ends beeing more new age, or even whorse, like AVP.

AVP wasn't New Age. New Age would be along the lines of David Icke and shape-shifting reptilians. AVP was nothing ground-breaking, in terms of theories (even though it believed itself to be so).

I just can´t stand the asociation about Aliens and Pyramids etc. Because Its a fact it´s not true.

Glad to see you've somehow triumphed in 100% proving that.

Personally, I've always found the whole 'gods from the skies' stuff intriguing. Not definitely proven or anything, but not overly ridiculous, either. When it comes to presenting it in movies, it all depends on how superficially you do so. It could be remarkably chilling if it's executed in the right way... As with all things.

It´s not like some crazy cities inside some mountain of antarctica or something similar. (its obviously no true also, but its not so obvious.). It´s just a feeling I have. Personal opinion of course.

Actually, the AVP thing fitted well with ancient maps which have shown the area was meant to have had some form of revealed coast and such. It's perfectly feasible that something could have been built there, under those circumstances. Possibility is seriously all you need for escapist fantasy films. They're meant to be about 'what ifs'.

[ChrisPachi]

...its undeniable that under the CGI flag, some of the most terrible and insulting crimes against cinema have been commited.

CGI monsters are mostly terrible - I am with you 100% on that one. And like you I am really hoping that we don't see a CGI Space Jockey. But even practical effects can go horribly wrong, eg. the final act of Alien 3 .

For flying spaceships and landscapes CGI is perfect though. The crashing 'thing' in the trailer will be CGI, no doubt about it, and it will look amazing. I just don't know why film makers would bother building spaceship models or doing matte paintings anymore - CGI supersedes them for level of detail and image quality.

CGI has it's place and can be pretty impressive when done right. We just gotta hope that Pinewood Studios has a decent fishmonger and an abattoir down the road.

Personally, I've always found the whole 'gods from the skies' stuff intriguing.

Same here, it's a fun thing to play with in your mind, however the majority of 'experts' in the field are complete nut jobs. And when Ridley Scott mentioned being influenced by Erich von Daniken I nearly died... I am just praying that he was very loosely inspired, as in, not at all.

-Chris.

[SM]

Even accepting the geography in AvP is correct - and it's completely wrong - Antarctica has been iced up for over 30 million years.

[ChrisPachi]

...prometheus-movie.com HAS THE OFFICIAL TRAILER READY TO LAUNCH

Bah, I fell for that so bad. Why... won't... the... play... button... work?!? Doh.

The official web site is prometheusmovie.com (no hyphen), and it's not delegated yet. This will be the site to watch, as it will come online with the trailer first I reckon.

-Chris.

[Tough little S.O.B.]

I love Lovecraft and his worls of crazy gods, but I´m afraid in prometheus ends beeing more new age, or even whorse, like AVP.

AVP wasn't New Age. New Age would be along the lines of David Icke and shape-shifting reptilians. AVP was nothing ground-breaking, in terms of theories (even though it believed itself to be so).

I just can´t stand the asociation about Aliens and Pyramids etc. Because Its a fact it´s not true.

Glad to see you've somehow triumphed in 100% proving that.

Personally, I've always found the whole 'gods from the skies' stuff intriguing. Not definitely proven or anything, but not overly ridiculous, either. When it comes to presenting it in movies, it all depends on how superficially you do so. It could be remarkably chilling if it's executed in the right way... As with all things.

It´s not like some crazy cities inside some mountain of antarctica or something similar. (its obviously no true also, but its not so obvious.). It´s just a feeling I have. Personal opinion of course.

Actually, the AVP thing fitted well with ancient maps which have shown the area was meant to have had some form of revealed coast and such. It's perfectly feasible that something could have been built there, under those circumstances. Possibility is seriously all you need for escapist fantasy films. They're meant to be about 'what ifs'.

Its not only that I dont belive in the conection Aliens-Ancient (but real) earth civilizations, but that I just find the idea completelly ridiculous. Scientology, Star Gate, The Mayans and Egiptians beeing slaves of Aliens etc. So boring and commonplace....

I do not believe in Aliens, Ufo´s etc. but I enjoy Alien and the posibility that theyr existence would be amazing.

Anyway it´s just my humble opinion of course.

By the way, in my world, AVP and AVP2 don´t exist.

...its undeniable that under the CGI flag, some of the most terrible and insulting crimes against cinema have been commited.

CGI monsters are mostly terrible - I am with you 100% on that one. And like you I am really hoping that we don't see a CGI Space Jockey. But even practical effects can go horribly wrong, eg. the final act of Alien 3 .

For flying spaceships and landscapes CGI is perfect though. The crashing 'thing' in the trailer will be CGI, no doubt about it, and it will look amazing. I just don't know why film makers would bother building spaceship models or doing matte paintings anymore - CGI supersedes them for level of detail and image quality.

CGI has it's place and can be pretty impressive when done right. We just gotta hope that Pinewood Studios has a decent fishmonger and an abattoir down the road.

Personally, I've always found the whole 'gods from the skies' stuff intriguing.

Same here, it's a fun thing to play with in your mind, however the majority of 'experts' in the field are complete nut jobs. And when Ridley Scott mentioned being influenced by Erich von Daniken I nearly died... I am just praying that he was very loosely inspired, as in, not at all.

-Chris.

Of Course there will be CGI! its not going to be THUNDERBIRDS. No problem with it only if they try to make them 100% realistic and not thinking that "everything goes".  Scott and someone else sayd that they will do as much as they can with practical, but I heard that before. (THE THING).

The FX for Alien3 were horrible. Practical efects that looked like shity CGI! Amazing.

[Thomas]

OK i think this "Viral PR stunt" has run its course by now. They are laughing at us because they got excactly what they wanted, us excited and most importantly talking about it.......

Good job.......

[ChrisPachi]

Practical efects that looked like shity CGI! Amazing.

Hahaha, amazing for sure. It's like taking a bad golf shot and hitting yourself in the back of the head. You couldn't do worse if you were trying.

...its not going to be THUNDERBIRDS

Aww.

-Chris.

[Space Sweeper]

DAMMIT, JUST GIVE US THE HD VERSION ALREADY, I WANNA WATCH THIS.

You still haven't, right?

Nope, holding out until I can see it properly. I hate cam footage with a passion.

[Eldritch]

I think we are reading too much into the "hints" we have been getting from the cast.

Ok, so they said there will be creatures that "we will recognize". Does this have to mean the Facehugger/Chestburster/Alien? It could just mean that there will be Jockeys/Engineers, and we do recognize them.

Scott said that the last 8 minutes of the movie will "tie in with Alien". No mention of HOW. It does not necessarily have to mean that there is a Jockey ship crash. It could mean virtually anything... for example, it could very well end with the Company finding out about what happens "out there" and they send instructions to a certain Mother to reroute a certain ship (Nostromo) to the new coordinates...

As for the "DNA" that Scott mentioned... I think it will be more of how the movie will be laid out. I see many similarities between Alien and stuff seen in the leaked pictures and videos.

- Both teams are stranded on an alien planet (though the Nostromo crew managed to take off after repairs).

- Both teams find and investigate an alien construction (ship/facility).

- Both teams find alien containers (Eggs vs. Ampules). This one is interesting as the original script by O'Bannon (R.I.P) described the containers as "amphoras" or "capsules", not eggs. (Source: Alien Quadrilogy)

- One in each team will be infected with an alien life form.

- The infected team member will give birth to a nightmarish creature.

- Both teams will have a female that will begin "in the background" and eventually turn around and become a real tough son-of-a-bitch.

I believe that the "DNA" will simply be the similarities between the two movies, in how they are laid out, their structure.

As for someone spotting people dressed in Alien/Xenomorph suits during an outdoors lunch break at Pinewood (or was it Shepperton?), I think it is just a load of bull.

[Engineer1]

prometheus-movie.com HAS THE OFFICIAL TRAILER READY TO LAUNCH... SORT OF.  Just checked it out, looks super-official, and just has COMING SOON.

The trailer is about to arrive, and in HD

WOO HOO

-Wilmer B.

The guy running this site is an attention whore.
His recent run on AICN talkback was miserable.

[JKS1]

For flying spaceships and landscapes CGI is perfect though. The crashing 'thing' in the trailer will be CGI, no doubt about it, and it will look amazing. I just don't know why film makers would bother building spaceship models or doing matte paintings anymore - CGI supersedes them for level of detail and image quality.

I'm not sure I agree with you on the point that CGI supersedes models/matte paintings when depicting landscapes, in terms of detail/image quality

For me its all about realism - do I believe that what I'm looking at is 'really there', solid and has that correct sense of scale

So far I've yet to see any CGI depicted landscape that comes even close to inspiring the same feeling of awe and 'realness' as the matte painting/model combination used in the opening sequence of Blade Runner

Can you give me an example of any similarly futuristic/fantasy/sci-fi type landscape imagery thats equally as 'real' or 'solid' looking as this, yet CGI  ?

All thats coming to my mind are the obvious CGI of the Colosseum shots in 'Gladiator', the obvious CGI in 'Titanic' and 'Avatar' and the hideous overkill and screamingly obvious CGI in Star Wars I,II and III

(Not to mention the complete and utterly shitty and obvious CGI effects in the green lantern)

So, please, some examples of scenes and movies where the CGI depicted landscapes and spaceships arent obviously CGI and really make you believe youre looking at something or some place thats real and solid and not a glorified cartoon ?

[Highland]

King Kong and Road to Perdition for a start. There are tons.

Paintings and models are good I'll admit, but CGI is just as good, probably better.