QuoteAccording to De Lauzirika, Scott was asked by Fox to make a new cut of the film for Blu-ray but refused, saying the theatrical version is his Director's Cut.
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/08/fox-wanted-extended-prometheus-blu-ray-ridley-scott-said-no/ (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/08/fox-wanted-extended-prometheus-blu-ray-ridley-scott-said-no/)
Full story at the link.
WTF!? What about all those alternate/extended scenes that were mentioned before? Or am I just being a dumbass and misinterpreting it?
How...disappointing. :(
Quote from: HUGZZ on Oct 08, 2012, 02:52:59 PM
WTF!? What about all those alternate/extended scenes that were mentioned before? Or am I just being a dumbass and misinterpreting it?
They're included for your perusal, but not as part of a new or extended cut. Extras only.
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Quote from: Valaquen on Oct 08, 2012, 02:58:11 PM
Quote from: HUGZZ on Oct 08, 2012, 02:52:59 PM
WTF!? What about all those alternate/extended scenes that were mentioned before? Or am I just being a dumbass and misinterpreting it?
They're included for your perusal, but not as part of a new or extended cut. Extras only.
Oh, that's still crumby :-[
Thanks for nothing, Ridley. ::)
The least he could do is release an extended cut with the deleted scenes (and any other missing footage) inserted back in and with the CGI finished. Who said it has to be titled, "Director's Cut?"
Yup... this is all for the fans. What happened to giving us the choice between 2 cuts?
I'm a little gutted myself. There are scenes that could benefit the film if inserted (character moments that set up later developments) but my biggest problem is that the final act is an absolute editing nightmare that could be fixed with some tinkering. A real shame.
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Oh I dunno. I expect he can still capitalise his sentences.
Lol. You're all acting like he shot your dog.
He'll do it eventually. Not that he's under any obligation.
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Oct 08, 2012, 04:32:19 PM
Lol. You're all acting like he shot your dog.
He'll do it eventually. Not that he's under any obligation.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wildinsights.com.au%2Fimg%2Fcms%2Fother%2Fanimal_communicator_tips_calm_scared_pet.jpg&hash=fc69f6e7f339bd95766869724d8183444643415e)
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fget-reel.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F06%2FRidley-Scott-Cigar.jpg&hash=0e6855f9d511c712bf7928295db502ce4f231408)
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Oct 08, 2012, 04:32:19 PM
Lol. You're all acting like he shot your dog.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi47.tinypic.com%2F20pd1yh.png&hash=9809c00c06918eb8da0471cfa7e0e83b6dd1f2f3)
Babeng.
Quote from: Gash on Oct 08, 2012, 04:10:31 PM
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Oh I dunno. I expect he can still capitalise his sentences.
Gash we all know Ridley wanted more money to make the film ,more time and especially an appropriate edition at the final cut.We heard Scott saying that he liked ,anyway, the way it was done.
But actually has more behind it.
Fox was for me ; regrettable.
No extended cut is fine with me, but he has some explaining to do in its stead.
the one thing i think we have come to learn in recent years is dont trust anything ridley says. of course he wont say theres an extended cut coming otherwise why buy the current bluray release. they are gonna want to resell the movie at least two more times in the future not counting boxsets
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Oct 08, 2012, 05:32:11 PM
No extended cut is fine with me, but he has some explaining to do in its stead.
Why should he? Film's a financial success. He probably does not care.
Well, as the blu ray is promoted as having answers I'm guessing he feels that the film as it stands is enough for part one, and the extras give you more info in the meantime. He may well be holding stuff back for part two, or he may just feel that the whole package of virals and alt takes elaborates if you need it. Personally I'd love to see an extended cut that was closer to two and a half hours because the film just feels too truncated in the final act, but I'm also thinking that maybe with Prometheus, rightly or wrongly, they are presenting things outside of the main feature not so much as 'extras' in the accepted sense but as parts of the mystery to delve into.
In that way I could see why Scott would stick with the theatrical cut.
And if it's a trilogy, then it's a good thing that it was devised as such from the start, unlike most sequels.
Go cry entitled 'fans'...
I love Prometheus but to be really honest i feel kind of frustrated after this news. I would've loved to see an extended cut. The talking engineer with Weyland would add so much to the movie.
At some point there will be an official extended cut for sure... However, what this statement tells me is that there isn't some harder/scarier version sitting on the shelf somewhere that the studio made Ridley lock away... The version we got is pretty much Ridley's vision. You better get used to it... or find something else to talk about. ;)
One thing still bugs me about 'Prom'.
'Prom' is set before 'Alien' right? may not be a prequel at the moment but its set in a time before 'Alien' and in the same universe.
If so then why is the technology in 'Prom' so much more advanced than in 'Alien'?
Am I missing something? just doesn't seem right.
Nostromo is supposedly a very very very old ship yaddayaddayadda.
Then LOL Sulaco and Auriga.
hmmm still doesn't really fit together though.
I know, right?
I'm on the comm right now :) film looks awesome on BR
Check what I put in the 'Blade Runner' sequel thread ;)
Even in the futures future things will start to look like junk from the 1970's? ???
One things for, don't leave us hanging brother Ridley. We need those sequels!
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
Because 'f**k you, Ridley raped my childhood', that's why.
Quote from: SiL on Oct 08, 2012, 10:34:44 PM
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after
Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
An extended cut would of been nice, if only to make good on some of the perceived potential that this film flaunts but never quite delivers on (opinion of course).
Have him get on with the sequel I say, that's where the goods are.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: SiL on Oct 08, 2012, 10:34:44 PM
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
The
Sulaco interior doesn't look more advanced than the
Nostromo, looks like an an aircraft carrier from Top Gun, but less realistic. The comp screen graphics have seriously downgraded too. Must've been a long recession and a lot of military cutbacks.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: SiL on Oct 08, 2012, 10:34:44 PM
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
Fortunately, i don't think we saw enough of the Sulaco to be pissed off about it. It could still have holograms and whatnot on the bridge or any other room we haven't seen in film.
Quote from: Gash on Oct 08, 2012, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: SiL on Oct 08, 2012, 10:34:44 PM
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
The Sulaco interior doesn't look more advanced than the Nostromo, looks like an an aircraft carrier from Top Gun, but less realistic. The comp screen graphics have seriously downgraded too. Must've been a long recession and a lot of military cutbacks.
When do we see comp screen graphics?
Oh well.... at least we've got the sequel to look forward to... if they do one :P
QuoteWhen do we see comp screen graphics?
We don't on the Sulaco - just text. We do on the dropship though.
Eh, he's saying what we got is the "Director's Cut." Doesn't rule out some alternate cut sometime in the future. Scott films are pretty well known for those.
Yeah, just give it 20 years.
And even without Scott involved, I'm sure Fox can do whatever they want. The Alien 3 Assembly Cut exists, after all.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 11:02:33 PM
And even without Scott involved, I'm sure Fox can do whatever they want. The Alien 3 Assembly Cut exists, after all.
Only 'cos Fincher didn't want a bar of it.
Fox
could do whatever they wanted, but Riddles has enough clout to challenge them if he wanted too.
Quote from: SM on Oct 08, 2012, 11:01:35 PM
Yeah, just give it 20 years.
Ultimately that's what it took for Blade Runner, but nobody was much interested for the first few years until it was rediscovered by people thanks to VHS. And wasn't the final cut held up by legal wrangles with some of the producers for a few years? And the added hassle of the desire to talk Harrison Ford around to involvement in order to make it the ultimate release?
Kingdom of Heaven's extended release was only six months after the initial theatrical run and was out on DVD within a year.
No extended cut would help the film in anyway. It would still be dud. A great looking dud, but a dud none the less. The only reason I'm buying the bluray is because of the visuals themselves and the creatures. I did enjoy all of that stuff. But I'm not that bothered that Ridley isn't releasing a director's cut because it really wouldn't matter.
QuoteKingdom of Heaven's extended release was only six months after the initial theatrical run and was out on DVD within a year.
Guess Riddles wasn't happy with the TC.
QuoteNo extended cut would help the film in anyway.
I think that's a valid point. I can't imagine many of the detractors are going to suddenly praise an extended cut.
Quote from: SM on Oct 08, 2012, 11:25:53 PM
QuoteKingdom of Heaven's extended release was only six months after the initial theatrical run and was out on DVD within a year.
Guess Riddles wasn't happy with the TC.
True, but as far as I know he didn't say it at the time - publicly.
What i'm saying is that if there's an audience appetite for it, it's likely to appear just before or after a sequel does, even if he claims to be happy. Maybe a better analogy would be Gladiator, which had an extended 'non director's cut' within four years. Given that DVD and Blu Ray editions are pushed far more now than 7 years ago I'd expect something sooner than that if it were to happen at all.
Ridley has lost it. I enjoyed this movie but an extended cut would fix so many problems.
Not hiring Damon Lindelof would of fixed so much more but it's as they say hindsight's 20x20
It really does take the piss, you'd imagine Prometheus would of had plenty of idea they shot but didn't make the final cut like almost an hours worth them getting into the pods shit like that 5 mins.
QuoteTrue, but as far as I know he didn't say it at the time - publicly.
Nor should he.
Quote from: SM on Oct 09, 2012, 12:35:53 AM
QuoteTrue, but as far as I know he didn't say it at the time - publicly.
Nor should he.
Quite.
Quote from: SM on Oct 08, 2012, 11:25:53 PM
I think that's a valid point. I can't imagine many of the detractors are going to suddenly praise an extended cut.
Perhaps not universally praise it, but I suspect some of the less "die-hard" haters would concede that some of the deleted/alternate scenes
do improve things. I still think the movie has major problems, but seeing the alternate mutant-Fifeld scene, or the extended opening, those are both elements I feel would have improved the movie. It wouldn't have necessarily made me
like it on the whole, but it certainly would have improved elements of it and given me less to criticize.
So there'd be less bitching, but still bitching nonetheless.
Quote from: Xenomrph on Oct 09, 2012, 01:34:13 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 08, 2012, 11:25:53 PM
I think that's a valid point. I can't imagine many of the detractors are going to suddenly praise an extended cut.
Perhaps not universally praise it, but I suspect some of the less "die-hard" haters would concede that some of the deleted/alternate scenes do improve things. I still think the movie has major problems, but seeing the alternate mutant-Fifeld scene, or the extended opening, those are both elements I feel would have improved the movie. It wouldn't have necessarily made me like it on the whole, but it certainly would have improved elements of it and given me less to criticize.
Well said.
I don't get why some people have such a problem with some fans wanting an official extended cut with the deleted scenes inserted back in, along with any other missing footage.
Sure, it won't fix everything but which extended cut has fixed everything? If it means it will improve the experience somewhat, it makes sense to release an extended cut. Sure, it could be seen as double dipping but Fox aren't above that. And fans will lap it up.
Quote from: SM on Oct 09, 2012, 01:35:42 AM
So there'd be less bitching, but still bitching nonetheless.
Well yeah. Like you said, that would happen no matter what. Frankly, that was going to happen no matter what 'Prometheus' ended up being, because you can't please everybody.
Quote from: RiddleMeTheus on Oct 09, 2012, 01:38:35 AM
Quote from: Xenomrph on Oct 09, 2012, 01:34:13 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 08, 2012, 11:25:53 PM
I think that's a valid point. I can't imagine many of the detractors are going to suddenly praise an extended cut.
Perhaps not universally praise it, but I suspect some of the less "die-hard" haters would concede that some of the deleted/alternate scenes do improve things. I still think the movie has major problems, but seeing the alternate mutant-Fifeld scene, or the extended opening, those are both elements I feel would have improved the movie. It wouldn't have necessarily made me like it on the whole, but it certainly would have improved elements of it and given me less to criticize.
Well said.
I don't get why some people have such a problem with some fans wanting an official extended cut with the deleted scenes inserted back in, along with any other missing footage.
Sure, it won't fix everything but which extended cut has fixed everything? If it means it will improve the experience somewhat, it makes sense to release an extended cut. Sure, it could be seen as double dipping but Fox aren't above that. And fans will lap it up.
Exactly. I'd love to buy an extended cut, and I intend to hold out for one. I can be patient. :)
Quote[I don't get why some people have such a problem with some fans wanting an official extended cut with the deleted scenes inserted back in, along with any other missing footage.
I don't have a problem with an extended cut. I'd watch it. Some fans feeling of entitlement to an extended cut and bitching and moaning at not getting one is amusing though.
No extended cut at least means no opening scene with aging Star Trek clones. That's a relief anyway.
An extended cut would be worthwhile because the editing in the theatrical cut was bloody atrocious. A decent cut could make a massive difference if it was able to slow things down a bit and add some weight to the second half of the film. The deleted scenes can stay deleted, even zombie Fifield can stay in - hell, don't change anything, just fix the darn pacing.
Quote from: SM on Oct 09, 2012, 01:49:28 AM
Quote[I don't get why some people have such a problem with some fans wanting an official extended cut with the deleted scenes inserted back in, along with any other missing footage.
I don't have a problem with an extended cut. I'd watch it. Some fans feeling of entitlement to an extended cut and bitching and moaning at not getting one is amusing though.
Not to much "entitlement" as complete confusion given FOX's track record with all 4 Alien movies, and damn near every Ridley Scott movie. A lot of his movies have gotten extended/alternate cuts, and they've arguably benefited from it. Especially given the knowledge we have of the alternate/deleted scenes for 'Prometheus', many of which arguably improve the movie, 'Prometheus' is practically
begging for an extended cut of some kind.
To have Ridley Scott explicitly say, "nope, not gonna happen" is just... baffling, if nothing else. At best he's lying to us in order to get us to buy the upcoming bluray release, which is still pretty shitty on his part - Guillermo del Toro was up-front about a 'Hellboy' extended edition before the first version even hit DVD, same thing with Robert Rodriguez and 'Sin City', and Peter Jackson and the 'Lord of the Rings' movies. At worst he's being serious and we're not getting an extended edition at any point, which is asinine and doesn't really make financial sense (nor does it follow the track record of his prior movies, or the other Alien movies).
Either way I'd say fans have reason to be displeased.
If this a 2 movie story and Prom II is long as 2 hours, I can expect a 4 hour assembly cut.
My feelings now, is that with time this movie grows. I watched twice. dont remember another movie this year I want it to see again, just the Batman. And Melancholia didnt make it at cinemas here. Maybe it was the expectation vibes I had.
Can someone post links of the alternative engind scene??
Supposed 'fans' would be displeased if they didn't have something to incessantly moan about.
Riddles didn't touch Alien for 20+ years and only then because Fox were going to recut it without him. He didn't touch Blade Runner for a decade or so too. Fox chopped up Kingdom of Heaven, so he got his directors cut. Since they're pulling out all the bells and whistles for Prometheus, if he wanted an extended cut he could no doubt get it. He doesn't. The movie did well enough financially, and the response was positive, so he might be figuring 'why bother recutting it'?
Sorta puts paid to all the baseless accusations that Fox forced him to make it under two hours...
QuoteThe movie did well enough financially, and the response was positive, so he might be figuring 'why bother recutting it'?
Because if nothing else it's money in his pocket. Like I said, not releasing an extended edition doesn't make sense given his track record and FOX's record with Alien movies.
Not to mention...
QuoteSupposed 'fans' would be displeased if they didn't have something to incessantly moan about.
...doesn't actually make sense. Like, what is that even supposed to mean?
"The Internet is a communication tool used the world over where people can come together to bitch about movies and share pornography with one another."
Holden McNeil
Shit I haven't watched that movie in forever.
The film only came out a few months ago, and it seems it was being worked on down to the last minute. Mr. Scott is deep into working on another film and probably has no immediate desire to jump back into re-editing something so recently finished. After furiously working on such a large production for so long, I would imagine it would be some time before he would want to re-visit it. If there ever is an extended cut, it will probably end up better off if the director has had some time away from the film and can look at it with fresh perspective.
I just don't think it is "established fact" that the editing was terrible (I certainly didn't think it was), or that Ridley was bound and determined to immediately deliver a longer cut on DVD and Blu.
In a way, the guy can't win for losing with some people. He murmurs about maybe doing another cut sometime and half the forum pisses and moans that he's just a soulless, money-grubbing old man out to bilk the audience for twice the cost. Then he doesn't do one and they call him a cheapskate? I can't buy into that. That's just a closed loop designed to make people feel self-righteous no matter the outcome.
The simpler explanations are the more likely ones, to me; he fought for the cut he got right down to the wire, he was happy with it, and he's moved onto something else. I expect that someday he will go back and touch it up, as he is wont to do, but not yet. And that's fine. I'm just glad he's done a good film (at least in my eyes) and not another shitty Russell Crowe thing.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: SiL on Oct 08, 2012, 10:34:44 PM
The Nostromo was designed to be a big, ugly, practical tug.
Prometheus was a flashy trillion-dollar dick measuring device.
I don't get why there's still a problem with this.
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
I agree. Why this is even a question is beyond me.
Look at ANY movie that did a prequel years after the original. Aliens was done in 1986 and was set way after Prometheus, yet when we go to the movies and see what's on screen, the "earlier" technology (Prometheus) looks "better" than the later technology (Aliens).
It simply has to do with when a film was made. It's been going on for decades. Why people moan about it as being inaccurate pisses me off. It's COMMON sense.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 08, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
I think more people have a problem with the fact that the Sulaco is supposed to be top of the line approximately 70 years after Prometheus, but looks ancient in comparison.
Personally, I didn't mind too much, but I can see where people find it annoying.
Again, top of the line functional military hardware.
My iPod Touch has a touch screen and flashy, jiggling graphics all up ins, but that's not what you design a freakin' military or industrial piece of technology to look like. They aren't about appealing aesthetics, they're about practicality. You need that information to be easy to navigate, read, and comprehend.
Prometheus is the showboat. The ships we see in the
Alien franchise are the tugs hauling its ass to drydock when it crashes.
You know, it's really just because things have changed in real life. Better technology and tools. Perhaps more, or maybe less creative imagination. Flat panels weren't even that much on the radar in the 70's. I think it would have been amazing if they had designed a ship that would have used every single thing we have today. That sure would have been some foresight. Of course guessing the future is f**king hard and it's even harder to want to go in reverse and use stone aged tools when you have lasers and airbrushes at your disposal.
This was discussed months ago!
See this people...
Quote from: Eva on Apr 12, 2012, 08:18:25 PM
To me it's pretty self explanatory
Prometheus
http://www.fona.de/mediathek/foto/B_5_4_1_Schiffe_teaser.jpg
Nostromo
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1234/1029847825_a5c83e0d66.jpg
Sulaco
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi42.tinypic.com%2F33yj448.jpg&hash=ed304fa2f7f9c93a9dfe178ac5413e77f3b8af03)
Love the designs I've seen sofar from Prometheus - all of them :)
I would not even dare to call myself a fan if i where one of those who complained over this movie, or avp or any sequel for that matter. a "true fan" should be open for change and new things. thats my opinion (i don't expect anyone to agree, i know what it will lead into, a war).
but as a fan i'm dissapointed because i would have wanted to see the deleted scenes put in, alternate fifield most so. i hope it comes out eventually, after this first release have been out awhile and things calms down.
Quote from: Shadow on Oct 09, 2012, 01:29:41 PM
I would not even dare to call myself a fan if i where one of those who complained over this movie, or avp or any sequel for that matter. a "true fan" should be open for change and new things.
What if these 'new things' and 'changes' are also shite.
Being a fan isn't blindly accepting something simply because it's there.
Personally I think some of guys are expecting too much. There never used to be director's cuts or extended cuts like there is these days. They were pretty rare much like behind the scenes footage/deleted scenes, I remember when 'Aliens' came out as the director's cut and it was like WOW!! that's a new and original idea! extra footage!!!!!
I recall buying a VHS featurette for 'Return of the Jedi' (the one hosted by Billy Dee Williams) for about £12 on its own! you never saw things like that a tall back before DVD came out (in the UK anyway).
Not all films require director's cuts or extended cuts, its not suppose to be a common requirement. More of a route if there were big issues for the director whilst making the film. These days its become a standard extra which means nothing.
Quote from: Gazz on Oct 09, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
Quote from: Shadow on Oct 09, 2012, 01:29:41 PM
I would not even dare to call myself a fan if i where one of those who complained over this movie, or avp or any sequel for that matter. a "true fan" should be open for change and new things.
What if these 'new things' and 'changes' are also shite.
Being a fan isn't blindly accepting something simply because it's there.
yup, the reaction i was expecting. im not saying you are wrong, either. i just think some of these fans, should be a little bit more open minded. i'm not mentioning any names here, i dont even memorize who says what. internet is a place where moaners gather, afterall.
Ridley has always stood behind his final directors cut, or should I say, the cut he intended. It was a similar story with Alien, he released the Extended Cut but made it clear in the intro, documentaries and even package notes that the original cut is the one. Same here, he stands by his product and thinks the extra scenes just dont work
More like he's giving FOX the middle finger.
Quote from: StrangeShape on Oct 09, 2012, 03:46:50 PM
Ridley has always stood behind his final directors cut, or should I say, the cut he intended. It was a similar story with Alien, he released the Extended Cut but made it clear in the intro, documentaries and even package notes that the original cut is the one. Same here, he stands by his product and thinks the extra scenes just dont work
DC is shorter than the TC.
:laugh: Just being a wanker!
Id rather see RS focus on making P2 answer the questions we all have regarding the film, rather than put stuff back in that was cut out. That little bit of "stuff" is not going to salvage P1 for me. No doubt we will see a DC, but my guess and hopes would be.. Get P2, and possibly P3 shipped, then do a boxed directors cut. That way its kinda final with no loose ends.
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
agreed.
Quote from: Gazz on Oct 09, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
Quote from: Shadow on Oct 09, 2012, 01:29:41 PM
I would not even dare to call myself a fan if i where one of those who complained over this movie, or avp or any sequel for that matter. a "true fan" should be open for change and new things.
What if these 'new things' and 'changes' are also shite.
Being a fan isn't blindly accepting something simply because it's there.
Never trust anyone who tries to tell you what a "true fan" is....
FOX needs to stop this nonsense already. As if it wasn't bad enough that they green lit a true Alien prequel and then let Ridley go to town with whacky ideas that changed the whole dynamic of the originally intended film. Now they are letting him get away with no director's cut at all? Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date and it desperately needs fixing. Seriously, what would compel him to think that Alien was in need of director's cut and Prometheus isn't??? This is baffling!
I think FOX should just go over his head and reassemble the cut pieces of Prometheus and make a marginally better film out of the whole mess. They did this with Fincher for Alien3 and the film was significantly better as a result.
Quote from: Negatronix on Oct 09, 2012, 07:52:18 PM
Id rather see RS focus on making P2 answer the questions we all have regarding the film, rather than put stuff back in that was cut out. That little bit of "stuff" is not going to salvage P1 for me. No doubt we will see a DC, but my guess and hopes would be.. Get P2, and possibly P3 shipped, then do a boxed directors cut. That way its kinda final with no loose ends.
No way. The writing is on the wall. This would be the same as allowing George Lucas to do episodes 2 and 3 after everybody saw The Phantom Menace. Sure the films will get better but it's clear that Lucas had lost his edge. I say give the franchise to someone else who still has the capacity to make something scary and intriguing. Ridley has lost it.
Looking forward to Ridley coming back for Paradise. Saved ALIEN from the dismally limited sequels it was served up.
QuoteFOX needs to stop this nonsense already. As if it wasn't bad enough that they green lit a true Alien prequel and then let Ridley go to town with whacky ideas that changed the whole dynamic of the originally intended film. Now they are letting him get away with no director's cut at all? Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date and it desperately needs fixing. Seriously, what would compel him to think that Alien was in need of director's cut and Prometheus isn't??? This is baffling!
Quite. I mean it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Seriously! What are they thinking??!!11 THEY NEED TO GIV ME TEH EXTEnDED CUT!!! I WANT!!!1!! MEMEMEMEMEME!!!!!
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
QuoteFOX needs to stop this nonsense already. As if it wasn't bad enough that they green lit a true Alien prequel and then let Ridley go to town with whacky ideas that changed the whole dynamic of the originally intended film. Now they are letting him get away with no director's cut at all? Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date and it desperately needs fixing. Seriously, what would compel him to think that Alien was in need of director's cut and Prometheus isn't??? This is baffling!
Quite. I mean it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Seriously! What are they thinking??!!11 THEY NEED TO GIV ME TEH EXTEnDED CUT!!! I WANT!!!1!! MEMEMEMEMEME!!!!!
Lots of crappy films have made lots of money. It doesn't mean fans shouldn't wish to see a better cut. And yes, there is such a thing as fan service.
I don't blame him for cutting the scenes out because guess what they make the movie more boring. You can do your own Extended cut if you click to the alternate scenes and watch them in the order they were originally supposed to go. Works just as good and watching the movie this way it really shows why the scenes are gone. They bogged the movie down. The only scene I wish they would've kept was the alternate Fifield. I like the Alien look better. But other than that the theatrical version is a much better cut warts and all.
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 10, 2012, 12:55:19 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
QuoteFOX needs to stop this nonsense already. As if it wasn't bad enough that they green lit a true Alien prequel and then let Ridley go to town with whacky ideas that changed the whole dynamic of the originally intended film. Now they are letting him get away with no director's cut at all? Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date and it desperately needs fixing. Seriously, what would compel him to think that Alien was in need of director's cut and Prometheus isn't??? This is baffling!
Quite. I mean it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Seriously! What are they thinking??!!11 THEY NEED TO GIV ME TEH EXTEnDED CUT!!! I WANT!!!1!! MEMEMEMEMEME!!!!!
Lots of crappy films have made lots of money. It doesn't mean fans shouldn't wish to see a better cut. And yes, there is such a thing as fan service.
Fans will always have tanties about what they think they are owed.
I'm sure at some point there will be a different cut of Prometheus. Some people just need to get over it until it arrives and/ or someone makes a fan edit, 'which is vastly superior because Ridley Scott is senile and has lost it etc. ad nauseum'.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:25:45 AM
Quote from: Gazz on Oct 09, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
Quote from: Shadow on Oct 09, 2012, 01:29:41 PM
I would not even dare to call myself a fan if i where one of those who complained over this movie, or avp or any sequel for that matter. a "true fan" should be open for change and new things.
What if these 'new things' and 'changes' are also shite.
Being a fan isn't blindly accepting something simply because it's there.
Never trust anyone who tries to tell you what a "true fan" is....
Affirmative!
I'm glad Ridley denied the Extended Version. I just watched all the deleted scenes and they sucked...
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:01:06 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 10, 2012, 12:55:19 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
QuoteFOX needs to stop this nonsense already. As if it wasn't bad enough that they green lit a true Alien prequel and then let Ridley go to town with whacky ideas that changed the whole dynamic of the originally intended film. Now they are letting him get away with no director's cut at all? Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date and it desperately needs fixing. Seriously, what would compel him to think that Alien was in need of director's cut and Prometheus isn't??? This is baffling!
Quite. I mean it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Seriously! What are they thinking??!!11 THEY NEED TO GIV ME TEH EXTEnDED CUT!!! I WANT!!!1!! MEMEMEMEMEME!!!!!
Lots of crappy films have made lots of money. It doesn't mean fans shouldn't wish to see a better cut. And yes, there is such a thing as fan service.
Fans will always have tanties about what they think they are owed.
I'm sure at some point there will be a different cut of Prometheus. Some people just need to get over it until it arrives and/ or someone makes a fan edit, 'which is vastly superior because Ridley Scott is senile and has lost it etc. ad nauseum'.
It's not about thinking we're owed something. It's about certain people claiming to be all about the fans when it's clearly not the case.
And I understand what you're trying to get at with the sarcasm but having seen a fan edit recently, I would definitely say it's superior to Ridley's cut.
You got nothing to complain about then. Everybody wins.
QuoteIt's about certain people claiming to be all about the fans when it's clearly not the case.
The majority fans on this site dug the film as is.
I don't think Ridley's ever said he's all about the fans has he? Not like all the claims made by the Strausses and Anderson.
Yeah I wasn't sure who RiddleMeVickus was referring to either.
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 10, 2012, 01:17:58 AM
I don't think Ridley's ever said he's all about the fans has he? Not like all the claims made by the Strausses and Anderson.
Ridley made it perfectly clear that he's a business man in a interview during the film's release. I don't think fan sites are really his concern. Though don't take that as he doesn't like the fans. He's done plenty of Q and A's at screenings of Alien and I think he and Lindelof did one for Prometheus.
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 10, 2012, 01:04:37 AM
I'm glad Ridley denied the Extended Version. I just watched all the deleted scenes and they sucked...
Yes, expanding on utterly retarded characters you care little to nothing about really does suck. So does making an idiotic, pointless God/creator-Engineer being into a slightly more thoughtful, godlike, and
intelligent being.
And lmfao @ the "what fans are owed" comment. Holy cow, just what? Let's be clear here: people develop expectations based on what they've seen previously. Prometheus simply doesn't measure up to Alien, but you all must insist that it does or you're cornered by your own bullshit arguments that turn any criticism into 'fan whining.'
Please, it amazes me how far people bend over backwards to make something sub-par into something good or even great, as great as the classic that spawned it in the first place. That's a sign of a damned desperate and depressing cultural state.
It's okay to acknowledge that it really does suck when compared to Alien, because it does. I've seen far more people over-analyzing negative opinions and turning them into slobbering fan hate than I've seen actual "fans" insisting that the movie should've been all of the things they wanted. The people defending the movie have stumbled into far more embarrassing rants that resemble the 'true fans' in question than the people criticizing it.
People just wanted a movie on-par with Alien. Prometheus isn't. That's the only objective standard necessary, and a completely reasonable one at that. Can we dispense with the fan talk, or must it go on? It doesn't have a real place here, all hot air. This isn't AvP:R, folks.
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.moddb.com%2Fcache%2Fimages%2Fmembers%2F1%2F436%2F435845%2Fthumb_620x2000%2Fyou_look_mad.jpg&hash=7f5ded42882300222430d75d6855ad50a4691f20)
And lmfao @ lazy, baseless and altogether ignorant generalising.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 01:26:54 AM
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 10, 2012, 01:04:37 AM
I'm glad Ridley denied the Extended Version. I just watched all the deleted scenes and they sucked...
Yes, expanding on utterly retarded characters you care little to nothing about really does suck. So does making an idiotic, pointless God/creator-Engineer being into a slightly more thoughtful, godlike, and intelligent being.
And lmfao @ the "what fans are owed" comment. Holy cow, just what? Let's be clear here: people develop expectations based on what they've seen previously. Prometheus simply doesn't measure up to Alien, but you all must insist that it does or you're cornered by your own bullshit arguments that turn any criticism into 'fan whining.'
Please, it amazes me how far people bend over backwards to make something sub-par into something good or even great, as great as the classic that spawned it in the first place. That's a sign of a damned desperate and depressing cultural state.
It's okay to acknowledge that it really does suck when compared to Alien, because it does. I've seen far more people over-analyzing negative opinions and turning them into slobbering fan hate than I've seen actual "fans" insisting that the movie should've been all of the things they wanted. The people defending the movie have stumbled into far more embarrassing rants that resemble the 'true fans' in question than the people criticizing it.
People just wanted a movie on-par with Alien. Prometheus isn't. That's the only objective standard necessary, and a completely reasonable one at that. Can we dispense with the fan talk, or must it go on? It doesn't have a real place here, all hot air. This isn't AvP:R, folks.
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.moddb.com%2Fcache%2Fimages%2Fmembers%2F1%2F436%2F435845%2Fthumb_620x2000%2Fyou_look_mad.jpg&hash=7f5ded42882300222430d75d6855ad50a4691f20)
Alright, wall-o-text here fizzles down to 'quit yer bitchin', fools'.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:29:08 AM
And lmfao @ lazy, baseless and altogether ignorant generalising.
To be fair your "hilarious" posts calling people out on so-called "entitlement" are no better.
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 12:37:11 AM
Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date
Well he's only made
three, and the first two he made are largely regarded as masterpieces of the genre. :P
I mean I went into 'Prometheus' hoping for a good movie, but I wasn't expecting him to revolutionize cinema or reinvent the wheel, especially given his track record in the years between 'Blade Runner' and 'Prometheus'.
QuoteTo be fair your "hilarious" posts calling people out on so-called "entitlement" are no better.
No.
Please note my use of the term "some people" rather than stupidly tarring everyone who didn't like the film with the same brush.
Yeah and neither was he. Like BANE said, all he's saying is "quit your bitching", which isn't exactly unreasonable.
That's not what he said at all.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Yeah, and its amusing to see the fans rally around these facts to justify their appreciation of the film. By stands set this high, someone could even argue that the
Saw franchise is just a series of masterpieces, one after another.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:29:08 AM
And lmfao @ lazy, baseless and altogether ignorant generalising.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tracecohen.me%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2Fsuccess_baby-kid.jpg&hash=7a708a883cf94716b50722b754eeee6383a23fd2)
Quote from: Xenomrph on Oct 10, 2012, 01:42:42 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:29:08 AM
And lmfao @ lazy, baseless and altogether ignorant generalising.
To be fair your "hilarious" posts calling people out on so-called "entitlement" are no better.
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 12:37:11 AM
Prometheus is easily Scott's worst science fiction film to date
Well he's only made three, and the first two he made are largely regarded as masterpieces of the genre. :P
I mean I went into 'Prometheus' hoping for a good movie, but I wasn't expecting him to revolutionize cinema or reinvent the wheel, especially given his track record in the years between 'Blade Runner' and 'Prometheus'.
I would rather blame Ridley Scott expectation than some misguided, Star-Wars-level fan attachment to Alien.
I just don't think that's really applicable in all of these Pro-metheus/Anti-metheus arguments. People on both sides have better points to make than that, uberfan or not. I think most people here saw the film with a very open mind, and the major division comes from the expectations that Ridley built throughout his own career.
These fan arguments make it feel like AvPrometheus. :-\
F that. I haven't seen anyone screaming "Ridley raped my childhood!" or "Ridley destroyed the Alien franchise!" People agree on most points, but it comes down to what you expected from the film and what standard you hold it to.
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 01:56:09 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Yeah, and its amusing to see the fans rally around these facts to justify their appreciation of the film. By stands set this high, someone could even argue that the Saw franchise is just a series of masterpieces, one after another.
You'd have a valid point if any Saw film has an overall positive response from critics. Must be devastating that a lot people actually liked Prometheus.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 01:26:54 AM
Please, it amazes me how far people bend over backwards to make something sub-par into something good or even great, as great as the classic that spawned it in the first place. That's a sign of a damned desperate and depressing cultural state.
I'm thrilled to depress you. But the truth is, I really didn't have to try hard at all to like the movie, because I actually, really, really liked it.
QuoteIt's okay to acknowledge that it really does suck when compared to Alien, because it does.
And it's okay to acknowledge not everyone agrees with you.
QuotePeople just wanted a movie on-par with Alien. Prometheus isn't. That's the only objective standard necessary, and a completely reasonable one at that.
No, it's your opinion. And you're going to have to start learning to live with it only being that. The Internet is hard, bro.
^ Wot he said.
I dug Prometheus in spite of it's many flaws. Is it on a par with Alien - no. But I never expected it to be. But I'd put it on a par with the equally flawed but still enjoyable Alien3 and Resurrection.
It's quite simple minded to restrict ones views to either "Classic" or "Sucked".
I think it's considerably better than both of those. But I also prefer AR to 3, so I am considered in some circles clinically insane. I'm fine with that.
I had one old friend who saw the original in theaters in '79 say it was the second best, but he hated Aliens and I assumed he had Alzheimer's.
It is what it is. People love it, people hate it, people are in-between. There's no absolute, and there's nothing any of us can ever do about that.
Haha I don't understand this DEMAND for an alternative cut. Why does there need to be one? why does Ridley need do to one? how would it make the film better anyway??
Everyone's opinion differs, what some may think is better others will not. Ridley made what he wanted and obviously felt no need to fiddle further, the moneymen obviously left him to do what he wanted, full control. Thus there is no alternative cut, get over it people!! geez!.
As some have said, give it some years when Ridley's own tastes/opinion changes and we might get something. The only reason for alternative cuts is mainly down to studio interference, not just for the hell of it. Although these days its admittedly just a money spinner, change a few shots, reverse this and that and voila! a new cut for the fans.
It's like telling Picasso you really like his painting, which is completed and he's proud of, but you want him to paint that little cat in the corner that doesn't compliment it at all.
Quote from: Gash on Oct 08, 2012, 04:10:31 PM
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Oh I dunno. I expect he can still capitalise his sentences.
Seriously? Is that all you could think of to say? Of all the constructive arguments and ideas floating around here, you decided to poke at his capitalization?
Grow up.
Constructive you say?
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Oct 10, 2012, 02:03:27 AM
QuoteIt's okay to acknowledge that it really does suck when compared to Alien, because it does.
And it's okay to acknowledge not everyone agrees with you.
QuotePeople just wanted a movie on-par with Alien. Prometheus isn't. That's the only objective standard necessary, and a completely reasonable one at that.
No, it's your opinion. And you're going to have to start learning to live with it only being that. The Internet is hard, bro.
I think the internet's easy, but please don't drag a perfectly good conversation into another subjective/objective argument, or I'll have to start posting wikipedia entries on things like character (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_(arts)) and plot. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plot_(narrative))
It says pretty plainly that the phrase "in character" has been used to describe an
effective impersonation by an actor. Are you suggesting that, thanks to subjectivity in opinion, an actor can never be classified as being ineffective due to the difference of opinion on whether they met the criteria for being effective or not? If there wasn't an objective for the actor to meet in the first place, then there would be no physical dimension of bad or good acting, no criticism whatsoever, because it wouldn't matter what the actors were trying to accomplish, or the story for that matter, because it's all subjective. A movie that makes no sense and has no point can never be labeled as such, because someone is free to disagree about that and think that the movie is legendary based on their own arbitrary standard that may or may not coincide with reality.
But to do this, you destroy any objective the original element may have had. Hence the antonym.
Continuing with this theme of character:
QuoteCharacter, particularly when enacted by an actor in the theatre or cinema, involves "the illusion of being a human person."[5] In literature, characters guide readers through their stories, helping them to understand plots and ponder themes
This statement also implies that a character has an objective that they can achieve or fail, hence why you can have an ineffective character that didn't properly communicate their meaning to the audience, like a bunch of scientists that act nothing like scientists but are trying to tell me they're scientists. I don't believe it, and I can objectively prove it since I know actual scientists, and through this thing called writing, we can recreate these real people in fictional stories and have an audience experience this effective character and whatever happens to it.
A plot also has an objective which it can achieve or fail, but I'll refrain from posting another massive slab of text. I'll try and make the rest a medium-sized slab.
All a comparison requires is a standard. You can pick any standard you want. I'm not running around yelling at people trying to get them to agree with me, I'm comparing
the film itself to many different standards, and when I show how it fails to meet those standards, people suddenly become personally insulted by it. If you disagree, I would love for you to show me examples of why you disagree based on your own objective standard, or mine, whichever one doesn't really matter, but you're communicating with someone using the same logical language. When you play the subjective card, you're not even offering up any logical framework for conclusion because you're just saying "because I said so."
This is nothing new, btw spectators. Ayn Rand has been talking about this for years. We're just arguing over how it's applied to cinema.
So uh... how bout that Prometheus?
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 04:02:41 AM
Constructive you say?
Constructive, SM ^ take notes.
Nah, I'm good.
Quote from: G8RSG1 on Oct 10, 2012, 03:59:47 AM
Quote from: Gash on Oct 08, 2012, 04:10:31 PM
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Oh I dunno. I expect he can still capitalise his sentences.
Seriously? Is that all you could think of to say? Of all the constructive arguments and ideas floating around here, you decided to poke at his capitalization?
Grow up.
Whoooosh!No, just at the hypocrisy. But hey, apparently it's fine to call someone senile in your world. Nice.
But if you can think of a constructive argument or idea to counter what I'd consider basic abuse please enlighten me with your mature analysis of why you support the theory that Scott is
in fact senile.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 04:05:09 AM
I think the internet's easy, but please don't drag a perfectly good conversation into another subjective/objective argument, or I'll have to start posting wikipedia entries on things like character (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_(arts)) and plot. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plot_(narrative))
Oh, boy! Wikipedia!
QuoteThis is nothing new, btw spectators. Ayn Rand has been talking about this for years.
Wow, Ayn Rand! Now I
know this is serious business!
Dude, everything is subjective, and publicly the movie met with decent financial success and a healthily divided reception. And that's
fine. If you have to resort to Wikipedia's rote definitions and
Ayn Rand to try and make a case for how you are absolutely, unequivocally, undeniably
right and correct, I think it's safe to say the trial is a mistrial and you're harshing the buzz. People differ, and that is okay. Let it go, Indiana. Let it go.
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Oct 10, 2012, 04:29:08 AM
everything is subjective, and publicly the movie met with decent financial success and a healthily divided reception
That second part is subjective.
Now you're just being an ass.
lol.
I'm telling the truth, and illustrating how SpeedyMaxx hasn't the faintest clue what he's just said. ;)
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 05:19:23 AM
I'm telling the truth, and illustrating how SpeedyMaxx hasn't the faintest clue what he's just said. ;)
The blunderbuss scattershot fire of "the confident approach" is admirable here, doll, but it really doesn't change what I said or render this debate less moot. Some people hate a movie, some people like it. That's fine. That happens everyday. You seem eager to somehow "prove it" in your own mind with "science" because you are apparently profoundly insecure about there even being a difference of opinion. I personally don't give a shit about the argument, and I don't consider either of us to be more or less of a 'real fan.' It's fine. It happens. I'm not going to force a fight over it, and I'm not going to take bait. Good luck with the rest of the board though. In conclusion, America.
Hey it's cool, baby. Just discussing philosophy.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fclothesonfilm.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F10%2FAlien_Yaphet-Kotto-John-Hurt-Tom-Skerritt-can.bmp.jpg&hash=3967c3f548ea2327b09bfeb2423394d533163a20)
Bad habit of mine. Don't have to get all hurt up in the butt. It wasn't about myself or you personally.
I assure you, kind sir, nothing on or about this board could butthurt me less. As I've said here in the past, the Internet is just not even remotely that srs. Life is too short.
Ridley disagreeing with an extended cut objectively pisses me off.
He's going full Blade Runner again. Let's take bets on how many years it takes for him to change his mind.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 02:02:21 AM
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 01:56:09 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Yeah, and its amusing to see the fans rally around these facts to justify their appreciation of the film. By stands set this high, someone could even argue that the Saw franchise is just a series of masterpieces, one after another.
You'd have a valid point if any Saw film has an overall positive response from critics. Must be devastating that a lot people actually liked Prometheus.
It's not, actually. I'm glad that a lot of people found it entertaining. I was never a big fan of the
Saw franchise either but a quick internet search will find you a lot of critical reviews in moderate favor of that movie too, just like
Prometheus. The point is more valid than you realize but to each their own, dude. You generally seem to be able to back up your opinions with a sound argument...so I know your defense of the theatrical cut of the film has been thought through and through. I just don't share the same satisfaction that you have with the theatrical cut.
Quote from: Valaquen on Oct 08, 2012, 02:46:51 PM
QuoteAccording to De Lauzirika, Scott was asked by Fox to make a new cut of the film for Blu-ray but refused, saying the theatrical version is his Director's Cut.
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/08/fox-wanted-extended-prometheus-blu-ray-ridley-scott-said-no/ (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/08/fox-wanted-extended-prometheus-blu-ray-ridley-scott-said-no/)
Full story at the link.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1202.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fbb361%2Fsamohtsphotos%2Fvader.jpg&hash=595461d341296d0d8a56cf7c2d7d18d32cfef29e)
Too much Jizz has been spilt in anticipation for what could have been...
Oh god Ridley. Why must you violate us? P-please...please s-stop. Oh god...OH GOD! OH GO- ...NOOO!!!!! NOOO!!!!
NOT THE SPIKED DILDO!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 05:58:24 AM(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fclothesonfilm.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F10%2FAlien_Yaphet-Kotto-John-Hurt-Tom-Skerritt-can.bmp.jpg&hash=3967c3f548ea2327b09bfeb2423394d533163a20)
Cigarettes. This film needed cigarettes - they just make people seem more, I dunno, REAL.
Maybe Weta can add some in...
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee395%2FChrisPachi%2FPromSmokers.jpg&hash=06cb0b8c905e5ecc6e6aa3427cf7ba38218abe59)
I love these guys!
at least janek smokes his cigarillo.
or was it a blunt?
hey and fifield hits the bong! so we have two smokers
ps: your pic in the spoiler tag, made my day! :D
Speedy....me love you long time ;)
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Oct 10, 2012, 10:27:02 AM
Cigarettes. This film needed cigarettes - they just make people seem more, I dunno, REAL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-iS7PKOrLc# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-iS7PKOrLc#)
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Oct 10, 2012, 10:27:02 AM
Cigarettes. This film needed cigarettes - they just make people seem more, I dunno, REAL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-iS7PKOrLc# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-iS7PKOrLc#)
I remember the first time I saw that bit in 2003...I don't think I'd read about it anywhere online. Caught me offguard and I actually rewound to see what the hell had just happened. :laugh:
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:18:56 AM
Yeah I wasn't sure who RiddleMeVickus was referring to either.
Lol, cute.
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Oct 10, 2012, 01:02:34 PM
Speedy....me love you long time ;)
What a shocker. :laugh:
I won't be surprise if a director's cut does happen when the sequel comes out. It happen with movies before.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 10, 2012, 07:34:12 PM
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Oct 10, 2012, 01:02:34 PM
Speedy....me love you long time ;)
What a shocker. :laugh:
I never touched him, baby, I don't even know him, it's all you.
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 10, 2012, 07:24:41 PM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:18:56 AM
Yeah I wasn't sure who RiddleMeVickus was referring to either.
Lol, cute.
Still not sure to whom you were referring.
As far as I see it there was only one scene that really needed reintroducing in to the final cut and potentially a scene that wasn't even shot, The scene I am referencing which should never have been cut in my opinion is the milburn, worm scene. I felt that really did bring a decent explanation as to where they came from.
There should also have been a scene where they reacted to the state shaw was in after the cesarean. I find it impossible to believe that no one thought of that in the editing room. Every scene after the "abortion" feels strange as a result of no one acknowledging it.
Otherwise though as I have said before I liked the film and have to say all the deacon bashing is amusing, but give him a chance he is just a baby.
Quote from: Pete Script on Oct 10, 2012, 10:53:55 PM
Otherwise though as I have said before I liked the film and have to say all the deacon bashing is amusing, but give him a chance he is just a baby.
i said the same about the newborn in alien resurrection. everyone called it abomination. i just imagined what it would grow into
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 06:21:21 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 02:02:21 AM
Quote from: Ash 937 on Oct 10, 2012, 01:56:09 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 12:51:12 AM
it reviewed well and made over $400m on a $130m budget with a restrictive rating, and they're pursung a sequel.
Yeah, and its amusing to see the fans rally around these facts to justify their appreciation of the film. By stands set this high, someone could even argue that the Saw franchise is just a series of masterpieces, one after another.
You'd have a valid point if any Saw film has an overall positive response from critics. Must be devastating that a lot people actually liked Prometheus.
It's not, actually. I'm glad that a lot of people found it entertaining. I was never a big fan of the Saw franchise either but a quick internet search will find you a lot of critical reviews in moderate favor of that movie too, just like Prometheus. The point is more valid than you realize but to each their own, dude. You generally seem to be able to back up your opinions with a sound argument...so I know your defense of the theatrical cut of the film has been thought through and through. I just don't share the same satisfaction that you have with the theatrical cut.
Not a single one has above 48% (the first one being 48%, and them progressively shitting up the screen from there) on Rotten Tomatoes. 'Moderate favour' is genuinely a kind way of putting it.
The audience was
much kinder.
Dont get me wrong I loved Alien and always will but I am starting to believe Riddles is a little too arrogant for my liking. In fact I think Prometheus was a lot of window dressing with a piss poor script. In other words he can go stick his latest effort up his arse. :-\
Shouldn't hurt too much. He's well lubed up with the oodles of money this movie made him.
:D Money cant buy you love
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2012, 02:40:03 AM
Shouldn't hurt too much. He's well lubed up with the oodles of money this movie made him.
Yeah. It's time he got a taste of the violation that he has dealt out to the fans!
No.
Oh yes. It's time to lube up the deacons head. It's got work to do.
Ridley does look like one mean drunk. He probably uses scotch as lube and then sets you on fire.
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 10:13:30 PM
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 10, 2012, 07:24:41 PM
Quote from: SM on Oct 10, 2012, 01:18:56 AM
Yeah I wasn't sure who RiddleMeVickus was referring to either.
Lol, cute.
Still not sure to whom you were referring.
I think you do know and at this point you just love challenging me on everything. 8)
And this is why Fox and Ridley i will not be buying this film, the only film in the entire franchise that i will NOT BE BUYING.
Time for us all to learn, never ever trust them again.
He says no NOW... give him a few yrs but he better hurry up he's like 75 now? lol
I think I'll just keep watching AVP. Same movie except it's more fun.
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 07:53:26 AM
And this is why Fox and Ridley i will not be buying this film, the only film in the entire franchise that i will NOT BE BUYING.
Time for us all to learn, never ever trust them again.
Where the fuc* does "trust" come into it? He's a film maker not a doctor or politician...
Quote from: Darth Vile on Oct 11, 2012, 12:25:39 PM
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 07:53:26 AM
And this is why Fox and Ridley i will not be buying this film, the only film in the entire franchise that i will NOT BE BUYING.
Time for us all to learn, never ever trust them again.
Where the fuc* does "trust" come into it? He's a film maker not a doctor or politician...
Trust comes the fuc* into it when they said the Blu Ray would be a longer cut, try to keep up. From his lying cheating mouth himself.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0 (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0)
You know what? If this bastard-child of a cut is the only one that we're getting, I ain't buyin'.
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: Darth Vile on Oct 11, 2012, 12:25:39 PM
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 07:53:26 AM
And this is why Fox and Ridley i will not be buying this film, the only film in the entire franchise that i will NOT BE BUYING.
Time for us all to learn, never ever trust them again.
Where the fuc* does "trust" come into it? He's a film maker not a doctor or politician...
Trust comes the fuc* into it when they said the Blu Ray would be a longer cut, try to keep up. From his lying cheating mouth himself.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0 (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0)
Why are you even having this conversation...?? I mean, if you don't know the guy then 'trust' doesn't even come into it, and if you did, you would also know Scott is a businessman first who said LONG AGO he was happy with this cut of the film! Don't get me wrong I ain't defending the film here, far as I'm concerned Prometheus is embarrassing even as a stand alone movie, but if you really feel that strongly about it then just DON'T BUY IT dude!!
What really bothers me after everything's said and done is how Ridley is still staunchly ignoring the glaring problems in his film.
Maybe that's to be expected of any director, and nothing critical will be heard from him until enough time has passed for $$ not to matter anymore, but it really justifies the comments about him seeming senile and the anger.
He gives us this half-assed crap movie that gets by on stunning visuals alone as his glorious 30-year return, and doesn't even have the balls to observe and criticize it with honesty. Makes him look like he doesn't even understand films anymore, the only other choice being he's simply supporting the film for money. Incompetence or greed, what great choices!
It's disgusting, and should be even more of an insult to those of you who think films are still 'art.' What kind of an artist could be so ignorant of their own work for money? Where is the integrity in that?
The rest of the crew did an amazing job, as well as the actors. The only people who should be really thinking about how they f**ked up are Ridley and the scriptwriters. Too bad their ears are stuffed with dollar bills.
Makes me mad just thinking about it. Even the mighty George Lucas admitted the prequels had problems.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 11, 2012, 04:49:39 PM
What really bothers me after everything's said and done is how Ridley is still staunchly ignoring the glaring problems in his film.
Maybe that's to be expected of any director, and nothing critical will be heard from him until enough time has passed for $$ not to matter anymore, but it really justifies the comments about him seeming senile and the anger.
He gives us this half-assed crap movie that gets by on stunning visuals alone as his glorious 30-year return, and doesn't even have the balls to observe and criticize it with honesty. Makes him look like he doesn't even understand films anymore, the only other choice being he's simply supporting the film for money. Incompetence or greed, what great choices!
It's disgusting, and should be even more of an insult to those of you who think films are still 'art.' What kind of an artist could be so ignorant of their own work for money? Where is the integrity in that?
The rest of the crew did an amazing job, as well as the actors. The only people who should be really thinking about how they f**ked up are Ridley and the scriptwriters. Too bad their ears are stuffed with dollar bills.
Makes me mad just thinking about it. Even the mighty George Lucas admitted the prequels had problems.
I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think Lucas admitted problems during the days of their release. Nobody would do that. I'm sure when Prometheus 2 is getting into pre-production, Scott will come out and say stuff like "We're gonna fix this, a problem we had with the first film" and stuff like that. And, it was either the editor(though I think Ridley would have power over him) or FOX that cut the film down. As a few people have said, companys will give...stipulations... Like, in order for this film to be rated R, it will need to be 2 hours or less, for more screenings per day. Also, as many people have said, Scott is quite the busy man lately, also his brother did die last month...I think we should give him a break.
Part of me highly doubts that his true "director's cut" just so happened to fit the studio's desire for an exactly two hour movie. There was a lot that could have been explained more. Scenes like the Engineer touching the chanedlier... no real reason to cut an intruiging scene like that out. Alot of the other deleted scenes are totally sketchy though and only seem to reinforce Ridley had no idea what he was doing, honestly. Some of them are cringeworthy. I am a fan of Prometheus and not a hater but the deleted scenes, while some add to the film, some simply show Ridley was a bit clueless on how to make this film.
Ridley has a lot to live up to with the sequel. We can't have this nonsense a second time or the entire series will fail.
Character development is the real issue this movie suffers from. The deleted scenes go a long way to fixing the problem, so whether they're in the movie or not isn't an issue for me, as long as I know where they belong and what they add to the table.
Quote from: Prime113 on Oct 11, 2012, 04:54:45 PM
I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think Lucas admitted problems during the days of their release. Nobody would do that. I'm sure when Prometheus 2 is getting into pre-production, Scott will come out and say stuff like "We're gonna fix this, a problem we had with the first film" and stuff like that. And, it was either the editor(though I think Ridley would have power over him) or FOX that cut the film down. As a few people have said, companys will give...stipulations... Like, in order for this film to be rated R, it will need to be 2 hours or less, for more screenings per day. Also, as many people have said, Scott is quite the busy man lately, also his brother did die last month...I think we should give him a break.
A good and thoughtful post. I agree with it all,
besides that last line. :laugh: If his brother died during production, I could understand if it affected his film.
From all of the extras and interviews, it points to Ridley being the man who made all the calls. Even Lindelof backpedaled and hailed the mighty Ridley for everything.
To be fair, Scott made some great calls, like the use of practical effects instead of full CGI, but these things were buried by oversights where the script was concerned.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 11, 2012, 05:39:28 PM
Quote from: Prime113 on Oct 11, 2012, 04:54:45 PM
I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think Lucas admitted problems during the days of their release. Nobody would do that. I'm sure when Prometheus 2 is getting into pre-production, Scott will come out and say stuff like "We're gonna fix this, a problem we had with the first film" and stuff like that. And, it was either the editor(though I think Ridley would have power over him) or FOX that cut the film down. As a few people have said, companys will give...stipulations... Like, in order for this film to be rated R, it will need to be 2 hours or less, for more screenings per day. Also, as many people have said, Scott is quite the busy man lately, also his brother did die last month...I think we should give him a break.
A good and thoughtful post. I agree with it all, besides that last line. :laugh: If his brother died during production, I could understand if it affected his film.
From all of the extras and interviews, it points to Ridley being the man who made all the calls. Even Lindelof backpedaled and hailed the mighty Ridley for everything.
To be fair, Scott made some great calls, like the use of practical effects instead of full CGI, but these things were buried by oversights where the script was concerned.
With that last line, I meant during the time he would have done a Directors Cut. I can't imagine editing a film I just completed, let alone one that has already been released to pretty good reviews, a few weeks after my brother has died.
I bet, in a year when FOX has racked in all the cash from the regular Prometheus DVD/BR, they will come to Scott and say "Hey, we made some good money with Prometheus DVD/BR. We're willing to finish the effects for the old scenes if you'd rearrange them for a Directors Cut." ....Or something to that effect.
But, yes, it does look like Scott made most of the major decisions, that's why I image it was FOX putting stipulations on his Theatrical cut.
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: Darth Vile on Oct 11, 2012, 12:25:39 PM
Quote from: dave1978 on Oct 11, 2012, 07:53:26 AM
And this is why Fox and Ridley i will not be buying this film, the only film in the entire franchise that i will NOT BE BUYING.
Time for us all to learn, never ever trust them again.
Where the fuc* does "trust" come into it? He's a film maker not a doctor or politician...
Trust comes the fuc* into it when they said the Blu Ray would be a longer cut, try to keep up. From his lying cheating mouth himself.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0 (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=44190.0)
You're weird... even in these parts, you're weird...
Ok, no way is the acting "great" in this movie. Idris Elba's accent is abysmal, worse than Casper van Dien in Python. It was embarrassing to sit through.
I think Milburn tried to pull off some country accent a couple times as well, or else is voice is just odd.
I was confused by Fifield's accent, and swear it changes a few times.
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 11, 2012, 08:53:35 PM
Ok, no way is the acting "great" in this movie. Idris Elba's accent is abysmal, worse than Casper van Dien in Python. It was embarrassing to sit through.
I think Milburn tried to pull off some country accent a couple times as well, or else is voice is just odd.
I think Spall (Milburn) tried to pull off the accent. Because in some scenes you can clearly hear that Southern drawl and in others it's completely absent. Hooray for consistency.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 11, 2012, 08:55:08 PM
I was confused by Fifield's accent, and swear it changes a few times.
That'd be Millburn's. And you're right, it does change.
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 11, 2012, 04:49:39 PMWhat really bothers me after everything's said and done is how Ridley is still staunchly ignoring the glaring problems in his film. [..]
Garrhh, your post made me mad too! Where is my damn pitchfork! ;D
I agree with you for the most part, but I just can't be pissed off about it anymore. It is what it is and while a cut that fixes the abysmal pacing of the second half is definitely something I would like to see, I am willing to appreciate it for what it is and hope for more. There are crap movies in most film franchises and that's OK I think, it doesn't 'murder' the franchise like some people here are claiming.
But even if Ridley does agree with us he is no doubt contractually obliged not to bag the film while it is still being marketed. I am pretty sure that even Fincher didn't do that, and he
hated his movie.
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 11, 2012, 08:53:35 PM
Ok, no way is the acting "great" in this movie. Idris Elba's accent is abysmal, worse than Casper van Dien in Python. It was embarrassing to sit through.
I think Milburn tried to pull off some country accent a couple times as well, or else is voice is just odd.
I could never work out what accent Nooms was trying to pull off. Didn't sound terribly English. Why not just make the character swedish?
Fassbender was good though. Everyone else was adequate.
Quote from: SM on Oct 11, 2012, 10:35:07 PM
Fassbender was good though. Everyone else was adequate.
I really expected a lot of the actors to knock it out of the park. But most of 'em didn't even have a bat to play with.
Quote from: SM on Oct 11, 2012, 10:35:07 PM
Quote from: Hudson on Oct 11, 2012, 08:53:35 PM
Ok, no way is the acting "great" in this movie. Idris Elba's accent is abysmal, worse than Casper van Dien in Python. It was embarrassing to sit through.
I think Milburn tried to pull off some country accent a couple times as well, or else is voice is just odd.
I could never work out what accent Nooms was trying to pull off. Didn't sound terribly English. Why not just make the character swedish?
Fassbender was good though. Everyone else was adequate.
Yes, Repace's accent bothered me too. Especially when the obvious intention was to portray her as a Londoner through Lucy Hutchinson. She is a very good actress of course and not her fault she is badly cast, but her accent is all over the place at times, what the hell was Scott thinking I wonder!!
On the topic of accents I can't help but laugh at Kate Dickie's - it sounds so forced, and she is Scottish ... oh no, I don't sound like that, do I? :(
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2012, 05:15:02 PM
Character development is the real issue this movie suffers from. The deleted scenes go a long way to fixing the problem, so whether they're in the movie or not isn't an issue for me, as long as I know where they belong and what they add to the table.
Poor character development and even poorer editing I would say!
Quote from: RoaryUK on Oct 12, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2012, 05:15:02 PM
Character development is the real issue this movie suffers from. The deleted scenes go a long way to fixing the problem, so whether they're in the movie or not isn't an issue for me, as long as I know where they belong and what they add to the table.
Poor character development and even poorer editing I would say!
Lack of story.
Inappropriate music.
It seemed like all the fundamentals of what makes a movie good were just not present in the writing room, on set or in post production.
I'm sure someone will make a fan-edit and incorporate the deleted scenes into the theatrical cut.
Quote from: tmjhur on Oct 12, 2012, 02:01:02 AM
Quote from: RoaryUK on Oct 12, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2012, 05:15:02 PM
Character development is the real issue this movie suffers from. The deleted scenes go a long way to fixing the problem, so whether they're in the movie or not isn't an issue for me, as long as I know where they belong and what they add to the table.
Poor character development and even poorer editing I would say!
Lack of story.
Inappropriate music.
It seemed like all the fundamentals of what makes a movie good were just not present in the writing room, on set or in post production.
Hmmm, I dunno about "lack of story".... most people seem to agree the story is there, but it's mixed with so much ambiguity with a chaotic script which goes nowhere much of the time, it's almost saying Scott didn't really know what he was doing, and yet the actual basics of it (ie: the discovery of artifact leading the adventure then all hell breaks lose) is there for all to see.
Quote from: RoaryUK on Oct 12, 2012, 02:31:11 AM
Quote from: tmjhur on Oct 12, 2012, 02:01:02 AM
Quote from: RoaryUK on Oct 12, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2012, 05:15:02 PM
Character development is the real issue this movie suffers from. The deleted scenes go a long way to fixing the problem, so whether they're in the movie or not isn't an issue for me, as long as I know where they belong and what they add to the table.
Poor character development and even poorer editing I would say!
Lack of story.
Inappropriate music.
It seemed like all the fundamentals of what makes a movie good were just not present in the writing room, on set or in post production.
Hmmm, I dunno about "lack of story".... most people seem to agree the story is there, but it's mixed with so much ambiguity with a chaotic script which goes nowhere much of the time, it's almost saying Scott didn't really know what he was doing, and yet the actual basics of it (ie: the discovery of artifact leading the adventure then all hell breaks lose) is there for all to see.
This, and also, I thought(its all opinion here, really) the music was quite good. There WAS that one scene with Hollaway, though. With the little eye-worm thing. Yeah, that was a little much, but beside that, I thought the music was very appropriate.
I think some of the biggest complaints towards the score have been the cues and when they're used in the film.
I don't agree fellas.
The story was: Man goes in search of their creators, man finds creator. THAT'S IT. I mean the entire story of this movie is the basic synopsis and if you have a minimal knowledge of the ALIEN universe you can logically assume that the creators in question are the Space Jockeys.
We were promised big ideas, an original stand alone movie. Well I'm sorry, but what we got was basically a prologue to something hopefully bigger. If it was a stand alone movie then the story would have a beginning middle and end. But unfortunately in the current Hollywood climate, if there is the slightest whiff of a potential multi movie franchise then they'll make the decision to rip a story apart and stretch and thin it out over 2-3 films.
In regards the music the "pseudo-epic-star trek next generation creation theme" didn't really gel to well for me with the "modern bullshit-post minority report-let's make everything clean and tidy Giger corridors."
QuoteThe story was: Alien sneaks on board spaceship, carnage ensues. THAT'S IT.
See how any film can be boiled down a simple sentence?
Even though I agree to some extent that it posed questions it couldn't or wouldn't answer.
Quote from: SM on Oct 12, 2012, 03:08:21 AM
QuoteThe story was: Alien sneaks on board spaceship, carnage ensues. THAT'S IT.
See how any film can be boiled down a simple sentence?
Even though I agree to some extent that it posed questions it couldn't or wouldn't answer.
Give me a break man. Alien is an amazing film with buckets of atmosphere,thrills, good dialogue, memorable characters and intelligence. It's got a simple story sure but it builds magnificently off that simplicity and will forever be a classic.
So when I heard that they were taking a different approach with Prometheus (which they didn't) and that it had big ideas (which it didn't), I expected it to have a very engaging story in place of the atmosphere and monster moments of the past.
In the end though it was essentially just a degenerative rehash of what we've seen before with a story which was more or less based on a line of Ridley Scotts Alien dvd commentary (re: The derelict was a bomber). The only thing new was the God angle for the Jockeys.
The bastards even cut the God V God angle out of the theatrical version; regarding Weyland and the Engineer.
QuoteGive me a break man. Alien is an amazing film with buckets of atmosphere,thrills, good dialogue, memorable characters and intelligence. It's got a simple story sure but it builds magnificently off that simplicity and will forever be a classic.
Of course.
Doesn't change what I said though.
Quote from: SM on Oct 12, 2012, 03:35:16 AM
QuoteGive me a break man. Alien is an amazing film with buckets of atmosphere,thrills, good dialogue, memorable characters and intelligence. It's got a simple story sure but it builds magnificently off that simplicity and will forever be a classic.
Of course.
Doesn't change what I said though.
Yes, it's true that any movie's story can be boiled down to a simple sentence. But that's not really the point, that's a tangent.
The point is that Prometheus is flawed across the board when it comes to the fundamentals of film-making while ALIEN is an excellent solid as a rock film.
Goodnight. :)
I swear these posts are getting dumber by the page.
Quote from: SiL on Oct 12, 2012, 04:16:58 AM
I swear these posts are getting dumber by the page.
Quote from: Valaquen on Oct 11, 2012, 11:14:26 PM
Quote from: SM on Oct 11, 2012, 10:35:07 PM
Fassbender was good though. Everyone else was adequate.
I really expected a lot of the actors to knock it out of the park. But most of 'em didn't even have a bat to play with.
Funny, I think they're getting better.
I seem to remember RS going on the record that the original version of 'Alien' is still what he regards as the 'proper' version... Didn't stop him doing another one.
And even then, the most obvious thing in the world to change - Ash's fake head having an intercut of Ripley and co, then flashing back to the actor - wasn't. And the most obvious thing in the world to reinsert, unchanged - the Space Jockey signal - was reinserted in not only an altered format, but one which made it considerably less effective.
It took him that long to get around to extended versions because that's what the DVD era heralded. Give it a while. We'll get another 'Prometheus' - and it'll probably be just in time for you to spend money on, immediately before the second or third movie comes out.
Quote from: SiL on Oct 12, 2012, 04:16:58 AM
I swear these posts are getting dumber by the page.
Thanks, and here I thought I was speaking facts.
Thanks for clearing that up though, now I know my opinion is stupid and I'm more than willing to alter it to suit what other people think.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 12, 2012, 07:38:54 AMWe'll get another 'Prometheus' - and it'll probably be just in time for you to spend money on, immediately before the second or third movie comes out.
Unite ye fools.
It is the truth, aliens is the haunted house in space slasher flick. Hell, no one(characters) in the movie actually gave a shit about what the space jockey alien was. :laugh: Thinking of it in that context does indeed make the questions asked in Prometheus appear large in scope.
So the questions were there to be asked in alien but not addressed at all. Where as they are being both asked and investigated in Prometheus. There's not really any answers yet though, mostly just clues. Gotta wait for Prometheus 2™ for the answers.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 12, 2012, 07:38:54 AM
I seem to remember RS going on the record that the original version of 'Alien' is still what he regards as the 'proper' version... Didn't stop him doing another one.
It took him that long to get around to extended versions because that's what the DVD era heralded. Give it a while. We'll get another 'Prometheus' - and it'll probably be just in time for you to spend money on, immediately before the second or third movie comes out.
Well, you gotta admit, he made like what? 5 different cuts of Blade Runner?
But Blade Runner had a lot of studio interference. Prometheus is what Ridley wanted.
well bring on the fan edits then; so sad that folks might have to resort to "other means" for an extended cut, especially when studios know there's a market for them.
Quote from: kittychu6 on Oct 10, 2012, 11:23:00 PM
Quote from: Pete Script on Oct 10, 2012, 10:53:55 PM
Otherwise though as I have said before I liked the film and have to say all the deacon bashing is amusing, but give him a chance he is just a baby.
i said the same about the newborn in alien resurrection. everyone called it abomination. i just imagined what it would grow into
i have to be honest... I hated the newborn and had no interest seeing what it could grow in to. i thought alien resurrection was probably the worst franchise destroying film ever... Only beaten by the phantom menace of course ;)
I'm not the first to say this, but oh the days when Resurrection was the worst film in the franchise. :laugh:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Funrealitymag.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F06%2Fresurrection-newborn-e1338862926335-465x241.jpg&hash=bf81920c3cf85cfd687e693f522473640870ddcd)
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:07:52 PM
I'm not the first to say this, but oh the days when Resurrection was the worst film in the franchise. :laugh:
http://unrealitymag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/resurrection-newborn-e1338862926335-465x241.jpg
It still is for me. :laugh: Although, I haven't seen the AvP films.
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 12, 2012, 05:15:59 PMIt still is for me. :laugh: Although, I haven't seen the AvP films.
I'm sure AVP-R would quickly steal A:R's spot on your list. :laugh:
AR, while very different from the first three, isn't really a bad movie. Its weird, it unnecessary, and its a bit disappointing, but I wouldn't call it bad. Its interesting in an absurd, very out there way. And the Newborn design is great, given that it is supposed to be an abomination and all.
And I still don't find the first AVP to be a bad movie. It comes no where close to either the Alien or Predator films, but its a fun ride in a really cool setting and lots of cool throwbacks to the originals.
And then there's AVPR... Yeah....
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
f**k you.
:laugh:
Quote from: BANE on Oct 12, 2012, 05:43:15 PM
f**k you.
:laugh:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frobertod.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F09%2Fdourif-alien.jpg%3Fw%3D450%26amp%3Bh%3D257&hash=e9a08f376eba47f75b51941e5693a09cd7e5db60)
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
Fair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that. 8)
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
...
I love you.
So much.
Not to keep going off-topic, but the thing I like most about Res is that it's self-contained, almost like a Marvel What-If? Whole thing was contained to the Auriga, besides dat clone Ripley business. :laugh:
Anyway no extended cut for you!
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 06:18:10 PM
Anyway no extended cut for you!
way to get back on topic :P
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 06:18:10 PM
Not to keep going off-topic, but the thing I like most about Res is that it's self-contained, almost like a Marvel What-If? Whole thing was contained to the Auriga, besides dat clone Ripley business. :laugh:
And, you know, the chunk of the Earth that the Auriga took out with them. Not big deal, though ;)
But Earth was already a shite hole, according to Johnner. Didn't sound like a big loss. :laugh:
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 06:49:04 PM
But Earth was already a shite hole, according to Johnner. Didn't sound like a big loss. :laugh:
Yeah at the end of the directors cut(?) Cal and Ripley both arrive on earth in Parris I believe,and it's pretty much a trash heap.
QuoteFair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that.
Some people say that about the Holocaust. You can't change history though. :P
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
QuoteAR, while very different from the first three, isn't really a bad movie. Its weird, it unnecessary, and its a bit disappointing, but I wouldn't call it bad. Its interesting in an absurd, very out there way. And the Newborn design is great, given that it is supposed to be an abomination and all.
I agree with these statements.
On the topic of A:R, I don't like the movie much like anyone does. After watching a lot of episodes of Firefly, and thinking about Joss Whedon's A:R script, you can see a lot of resemblance with the Betty crew and that of Serenity.
I quite like AR. It is what it is. And it's a total departure, and it works for me, though it is certainly very flawed. But after 3, you had to do something wild and different.
I also think Sigourney Weaver gives one of the best performances of her career as Ripley 8. Very animalistic, spellbinding to watch. I wish she'd gotten to play that Ripley again.
I used to loathe Resurrection, I still think it's silly but as a sci fi movie it's decent.
It very much feels like it could be a Dark Horse story and I think it's successful if looked upon on those terms.
All of Joss Whedon's writing feels very comic bookish and A:R is no exception.
It's pretty much a spin off at this point anyway. I doubt there'll be a sequel and with all love and respect Sigourney seems too old now.
But if they want to make more Alien films all they have to do is make some poor unfortunates stumble across some eggs. Bingo.
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 12, 2012, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
Fair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that. 8)
Res? Alien 3? What are these movies you speak of?
As far as I am concerned, Ripley and the others are still floating around in space.
Quote from: samoht on Oct 13, 2012, 05:22:53 AM
As far as I am concerned, Ripley and the others are still floating around in space.
In a damaged EEV headed to a prison planet.
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 12, 2012, 06:02:52 PM
Fair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that. 8)
This. Though I would have prefered Ripley's story ended at Aliens, presumably headed back toward Earth, if there was going to be another movie with Ripley to tie it up, Alien3 was the best possible outcome in my mind.
Not to mention I personally like Prometheus a lot more than Resurrection.
I think 3 worked nicely thematically.
It will always be a flawed but interesting film. It has a lot of great ideas but I don't think it flows amazingly. It gets a bit stuck in places.
Too bad poor Michael Biehn didn't get that starring vehicle for 3 and create that team of rebels fighting the company.
I thought the first Dark Horse stories set up the characters nicely with him being shell shocked and having some nasty facial burns. Newt was in an asylum. Would be interesting ways to start the characters off instead of being dead.
OMG Ridley Scott goes full retarded.
Quote from: samoht on Oct 13, 2012, 05:22:53 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 12, 2012, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
Fair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that. 8)
Res? Alien 3? What are these movies you speak of?
As far as I am concerned, Ripley and the others are still floating around in space.
In my mind it's ripley and jonesy float in space.
In my mind the crew of the Nostromo are still in cryo, heading to Earth.
In my mind Roby is still aboard the Snark 2 lifeboat, heading for Irth.
In my mind, Lt. Doolittle is still surfing his way down into the planet in Dark Star.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_y1USaJemzSs%2FSQguCxSVLPI%2FAAAAAAAACrI%2FqNpweopoZpw%2Fs400%2Fdarkstar%2Bend.jpg&hash=b6a848eda9620e2259d9f84d06ef06486ca62b54)
Alien isn't canon! What are you guys, crazy?
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on Oct 14, 2012, 03:30:26 PM
Alien isn't canon! What are you guys, crazy?
Finally someone agrees. That movie sucked, anyways.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi959.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fae77%2Fproject412%2Fright-1.jpg&hash=44058e76c0480a5d2e59f24bf251205b1bf941a4)
Right?
In my mind ... oh f**k it! :D
Quote from: fiveways on Oct 14, 2012, 03:21:45 PM
Quote from: samoht on Oct 13, 2012, 05:22:53 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Oct 12, 2012, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 12, 2012, 05:30:54 PM
Resurrection blows Prometheus out of the water.
...
Yeah I said it. :laugh: I just give it more points for being a complete story and having less noticeable plot holes. Not trying to bait anyone, you sensitive asses. :P I was also honestly more moved by parts of Resurrection, like Ripley facing her clones, than Prometheus, and some parts scared me a lot more than anything in Prometheus.
Res would've been in a different league had the newborn been something wicked awesome.
Fair enough. In my mind, Res doesn't exist because the concept is silly and the series ended perfectly with Alien 3.
But different strokes for different folks and all that. 8)
Res? Alien 3? What are these movies you speak of?
As far as I am concerned, Ripley and the others are still floating around in space.
In my mind it's ripley and jonesy float in space.
In space, no one can quench your thirst like a Ripley and Jonesy Float™
Quote from: Gash on Oct 10, 2012, 04:13:19 AM
Quote from: G8RSG1 on Oct 10, 2012, 03:59:47 AM
Quote from: Gash on Oct 08, 2012, 04:10:31 PM
Quote from: Kol on Oct 08, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
so sad.
clearly an evidence, that scott became senile.
Oh I dunno. I expect he can still capitalise his sentences.
Seriously? Is that all you could think of to say? Of all the constructive arguments and ideas floating around here, you decided to poke at his capitalization?
Grow up.
Whoooosh!
No, just at the hypocrisy. But hey, apparently it's fine to call someone senile in your world. Nice.
But if you can think of a constructive argument or idea to counter what I'd consider basic abuse please enlighten me with your mature analysis of why you support the theory that Scott is in fact senile.
Evidently not then?
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 14, 2012, 03:22:27 PM
In my mind the crew of the Nostromo are still in cryo, heading to Earth.
With the original Science Officer.
In my mind shemale porn is gre-....wait.......
In my mind the crew of the Nostromo aren't born yet.
But when FOX says they want an extended cut, magically there will be 2 hour plus of footage that makes perfect sense to everyone.
You already have a 2 hour plus cut.
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
Quote from: SM on Oct 18, 2012, 07:40:25 PM
You already have a 2 hour plus cut.
That's a really pedantic way to miss his point.
Not my fault if he chose a dumb way to make his point.
Just perpetuates the myth the Fox forced Riddles to keep it under 2 hours.
Lucky he has you to defend him though, eh?
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 01:02:14 AM
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
I have also been watching a fan edit with the deleted and extended scenes re-inserted and I respectfully disagree.
Some of the smaller scenes, like "We are no longer alone", "Our first alien", "skin", and the like bring a greater sense of continuity to the film, making latter actions taken now make sense in terms of the broader narrative, instead of being things that just happen.
Janek Fills Vickers In and The Engineer Speaks both bring a sense of depth to the film that was missing before, and the latter just about changes the entire point of the film.
Extended scenes like the King Has His Reign scene between Vickers and Weyland bring character to those that had little.
The alternate Fifield Attacks brings a sense of consistency across the title's creature design that I didn't realize the film was lacking until I saw it.
And that's just the ones I remember off the top of my head.
I definitely think an extended cut is the better cut of the film.
Quote from: SM on Oct 19, 2012, 01:11:01 AM
Not my fault if he chose a dumb way to make his point.
Not really; I got his point, I suspect others did too. Your post didn't contribute a whole lot other than point out a pedantic "mistake" and ignore his point entirely.
Good thing you were around to correct his mistake, eh?
Quote from: HybridNewborn on Oct 19, 2012, 01:14:40 AM
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 01:02:14 AM
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
I have also been watching a fan edit with the deleted and extended scenes re-inserted and I respectfully disagree.
Some of the smaller scenes, like "We are no longer alone", "Our first alien", "skin", and the like bring a greater sense of continuity to the film, making latter actions taken now make sense in terms of the broader narrative, instead of being things that just happen.
Janek Fills Vickers In and The Engineer Speaks both bring a sense of depth to the film that was missing before, and the latter just about changes the entire point of the film.
Extended scenes like the King Has His Reign scene between Vickers and Weyland bring character to those that had little.
The alternate Fifield Attacks brings a sense of consistency across the title's creature design that I didn't realize the film was lacking until I saw it.
And that's just the ones I remember off the top of my head.
I definitely think an extended cut is the better cut of the film.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said, although I disagree on the bit with the Engineer speaking. As much as I dislike the direction they took with the Engineers, I think it works a whole lot better if he's silent.
Quote from: HybridNewborn on Oct 19, 2012, 01:14:40 AM
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 01:02:14 AM
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
I have also been watching a fan edit with the deleted and extended scenes re-inserted and I respectfully disagree.
Some of the smaller scenes, like "We are no longer alone", "Our first alien", "skin", and the like bring a greater sense of continuity to the film, making latter actions taken now make sense in terms of the broader narrative, instead of being things that just happen.
Janek Fills Vickers In and The Engineer Speaks both bring a sense of depth to the film that was missing before, and the latter just about changes the entire point of the film.
Extended scenes like the King Has His Reign scene between Vickers and Weyland bring character to those that had little.
The alternate Fifield Attacks brings a sense of consistency across the title's creature design that I didn't realize the film was lacking until I saw it.
And that's just the ones I remember off the top of my head.
I definitely think an extended cut is the better cut of the film.
Okay I'll give you those two, but the other scenes didn't add much IMO.
I can understand why the skin scene got cut. You don't go about claiming that your film is not an X movie and then go and put in one of the original X movies most recognisable tropes.
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Oct 19, 2012, 04:43:16 AM
I can understand why the skin scene got cut. You don't go about claiming that your film is not an X movie and then go and put in one of the original X movies most recognisable tropes.
Although it was always an X movie, and as soon as the Jockey chair appeared in the trailer the bluff was called.
To be brutally honest I thought they cut the skin scene cos it looked like Milburn was examining Lisa Riley's thong.
Quote from: Gash on Oct 19, 2012, 04:59:44 AMAlthough it was always an X movie, and as soon as the Jockey chair appeared in the trailer the bluff was called.
True enough, but it is one thing to link them by lore than to pretty much duplicate a scene from the original. It's a little too X-ish, if you get my meaning.
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 02:01:58 AM
Quote from: HybridNewborn on Oct 19, 2012, 01:14:40 AM
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 01:02:14 AM
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
I have also been watching a fan edit with the deleted and extended scenes re-inserted and I respectfully disagree.
Some of the smaller scenes, like "We are no longer alone", "Our first alien", "skin", and the like bring a greater sense of continuity to the film, making latter actions taken now make sense in terms of the broader narrative, instead of being things that just happen.
Janek Fills Vickers In and The Engineer Speaks both bring a sense of depth to the film that was missing before, and the latter just about changes the entire point of the film.
Extended scenes like the King Has His Reign scene between Vickers and Weyland bring character to those that had little.
The alternate Fifield Attacks brings a sense of consistency across the title's creature design that I didn't realize the film was lacking until I saw it.
And that's just the ones I remember off the top of my head.
I definitely think an extended cut is the better cut of the film.
Okay I'll give you those two, but the other scenes didn't add much IMO.
Its not just about the script its more how its filmed. lots of great movies have the same boring scrips and plots but the acting , filming and mood of the movie is wat makes it good.
Out of curiosity name me one movie where a movie with a bad script that has actually turned out good. Yes, I can say some movies have been okay. Films Like the Phantom Menace, the Transformers films, the latest Indiana Jones film have terrible scripts but they're actually a lot of fun to watch. I guess Prometheus can go under that category to some people but I was just bored with it.
To be fair the script for 'Alien' isn't exactly remarkable. In fact I'd say it's the weakest part of the movie. If it wasn't carried by the excellent acting, direction, creature design, etc, I don't think the movie would have been nearly the phenomenon it ended up becoming.
The script for Alien is the only script I've read that's actually creeped me out. Even O'Bannon's early drafts gave me a great sense of atmosphere while reading it.
I thought Alien's script, both versions [O'Bannon/Giler & Hill] were great reads. O'Bannon's for what could've been and a nice, comic book sort of thing, and Giler and Hill's for this clipped, harder version of what O'Bannon wrote. The script was bare, but not bad. To me :)
Quote from: Xenomrph on Oct 19, 2012, 01:18:54 AM
Quote from: SM on Oct 19, 2012, 01:11:01 AM
Not my fault if he chose a dumb way to make his point.
Not really; I got his point, I suspect others did too. Your post didn't contribute a whole lot other than point out a pedantic "mistake" and ignore his point entirely.
Good thing you were around to correct his mistake, eh?
Quote from: HybridNewborn on Oct 19, 2012, 01:14:40 AM
Quote from: echobbase79 on Oct 19, 2012, 01:02:14 AM
I've been watching a fan edit with most of the material back in and it still a the same boring but pretty film as before. A extended cut will not help this movie. It's the same as the AvP extended cut, nothing can make up for a bad script.
I have also been watching a fan edit with the deleted and extended scenes re-inserted and I respectfully disagree.
Some of the smaller scenes, like "We are no longer alone", "Our first alien", "skin", and the like bring a greater sense of continuity to the film, making latter actions taken now make sense in terms of the broader narrative, instead of being things that just happen.
Janek Fills Vickers In and The Engineer Speaks both bring a sense of depth to the film that was missing before, and the latter just about changes the entire point of the film.
Extended scenes like the King Has His Reign scene between Vickers and Weyland bring character to those that had little.
The alternate Fifield Attacks brings a sense of consistency across the title's creature design that I didn't realize the film was lacking until I saw it.
And that's just the ones I remember off the top of my head.
I definitely think an extended cut is the better cut of the film.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said, although I disagree on the bit with the Engineer speaking. As much as I dislike the direction they took with the Engineers, I think it works a whole lot better if he's silent.
Out of all the deleted scenes, I think the engineer speaking was one of the good ones! well.. maybe not the engineer speaking, but weyland talking about gods. About how he was like god because he created David. About how gods deserve to live forever. I felt like this was the "tears in rain" moment, and I think it's a shame they cut it out. It actually gave me chills when i watched it. :(
To me, what makes the original Alien film rise above the shooting script (which wasn't bad, mind you), was the naturalistic acting and dialogue that Ridley Scott captured. You used to see this in great '70s movies. The actors are talking back and forth like real people do, in the real world. Many times, people talk over one another, or get cut off. It makes you pay attention because the dialogue is so dynamic. It seems effortless and extemporaneous, and never does it appear that we are watching actors read from a script.
Another film that did this wonderfully was "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". Earlier films like "Serpico" and "Dog Day Afternoon" are similar examples.
I don't know why directors have moved away from this realistic "verite" style.
Anyways...this is one of my favorite aspects about the acting and directing of "Alien".
Can't argue with that. It's one of the things that adds extra gravitas to cinema of the 1970s.
Quote from: Deuterium on Oct 23, 2012, 08:25:16 PM
To me, what makes the original Alien film rise above the shooting script (which wasn't bad, mind you), was the naturalistic acting and dialogue that Ridley Scott captured. You used to see this in great '70s movies. The actors are talking back and forth like real people do, in the real world. Many times, people talk over one another, or get cut off. It makes you pay attention because the dialogue is so dynamic. It seems effortless and extemporaneous, and never does it appear that we are watching actors read from a script.
Another film that did this wonderfully was "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". Earlier films like "Serpico" and "Dog Day Afternoon" are similar examples.
I don't know why directors have moved away from this realistic "verite" style.
Anyways...this is one of my favorite aspects about the acting and directing of "Alien".
Couldn't agree more, Deuterium, I've been thinking this for quite a while now. Another film, IMO, that really manages to capture that dynamic would be Jaws. Some of Lars von Trier's movies too.
Of all people, Ridley Scott had all of my votes when it came to pulling incredible performances from actors, and actually improving the acting in his film through close involvement with the actors and a balls-to-the-wall, passionate vision for what he wanted.
Seems like with Prometheus, all of that passion was applied to the visuals, and the actual acting and characters were somewhat of an afterthought outside of representing these huge, obvious, and often revisited 'grand themes.'
I remember watching the extras for Black Hawk Down, and some of the actors talk about random things that Ridley would do to make the performances more geniune, like having random explosions going off around them that they had no clue about. Apparently that was back in the day when he really paid attention to what the performances looked like on screen.
I don't know whether to blame some modern trend or oversight on Scott's part. In the end, though, I think the general audience noticed.
I don't think Scott has changed his approach to actors, he built the sets and stop-gap visualisations for the benefit of a more 'real performance, and is still pulling tricks to keep actors on their toes.
But then, personally, I still feel that Prometheus - in parts - conveys a more 1970s feel than any other sci-fi film I've seen in years. Moon being another rare example.
Quote from: Gash on Oct 23, 2012, 09:09:43 PM
I don't think Scott has changed his approach to actors, he built the sets and stop-gap visualisations for the benefit of a more 'real performance, and is still pulling tricks to keep actors on their toes.
But then, personally, I still feel that Prometheus - in parts - conveys a more 1970s feel than any other sci-fi film I've seen in years. Moon being another rare example.
Yes, I will definitely agree with "Moon". But then again, Sam Rockwell would still be interesting to watch if he was just reading a telephone directory. But yes, Duncan Jones and Sam Rockwell definitely captured that naturalistic dialogue and character interaction which seems to be so lacking in modern Hollywood cinema.
Often, the delivery of the dialogue is so precise and unnaturally fluid, it is like watching a tennis match from the judges stand. Back -- forth --back -- forth. Rinse and repeat. In real life, people don't converse and interact so mechanically.
Ultimately, what makes the "naturalistic" approach (for lack of a better word) so appealing to me, is the perceived spontaneity. Again, using "Alien", or "Close Encounters" as specific examples...the illusion that is created is:
a) The person speaking has literally just constructed, in their mind, what he/she is about to say, for the first time.
b) The person listening and receiving the dialogue has literally just heard it for the very first time.
Obviously, this is not an easy thing to pull off...and it takes very talented actors, and more often than not, an equally talented director to accomplish this. Of course, allowing the actors to do a certain amount of creative, freestyle ad-libbing, while still hitting all the critical, key "notes" of a given scene, greatly helps in this process.
Quote from: Deuterium on Oct 24, 2012, 02:15:34 AM
Yes, I will definitely agree with "Moon". But then again, Sam Rockwell would still be interesting to watch if he was just reading a telephone directory. But yes, Duncan Jones and Sam Rockwell definitely captured that naturalistic dialogue and character interaction which seems to be so lacking in modern Hollywood cinema.
Often, the delivery of the dialogue is so precise and unnaturally fluid, it is like watching a tennis match from the judges stand. Back -- forth --back -- forth. Rinse and repeat. In real life, people don't converse and interact so mechanically.
Ultimately, what makes the "naturalistic" approach (for lack of a better word) so appealing to me, is the perceived spontaneity. Again, using "Alien", or "Close Encounters" as specific examples...the illusion that is created is:
a) The person speaking has literally just constructed, in their mind, what he/she is about to say, for the first time.
b) The person listening and receiving the dialogue has literally just heard it for the very first time.
Obviously, this is not an easy thing to pull off...and it takes very talented actors, and more often than not, an equally talented director to accomplish this. Of course, allowing the actors to do a certain amount of creative, freestyle ad-libbing, while still hitting all the critical, key "notes" of a given scene, greatly helps in this process.
Yes, your posts are like f**king fine wine.
It's hard to tell if it's simply poor acting or weak dialogue. I know many actors will simply ad-lib, or say what comes naturally in the scene after they've learned the dialogue and understand the character. Harrison Ford does this, I'm sure many good actors do because they can
tell what is appropriate for the character; they know what good acting is. They can command their character to push it to its fullest potential. But how studly of an actor/actress do you have to be to have that sort of freedom, especially working with a director like Ridley Scott? Even Fassbender is a relatively new actor in the Hollywood scene. I think Guy Pearce probably has the longest-running career of anyone in the film, besides maybe Charlize.
Also, at what point do you get into a script, as an actor, and say "this guy is just written this way, and I can't change a few lines without changing his entire character?" I mean, in a film like Prometheus, some people literally have only a handful of lines, just minutes on-screen. This makes each line pretty critical in defining any sort of character before the imminent death.
And Ridley wants a certain vision so adamantly. That's all many of the actors seemed to talk about.. which kind of sounds like Ridley wanted everything exactly his way, and got it, so how brave do you have to be to start changing up the lines on your own if you're some of these lesser-known actors? I'm just curious. Many of them were probably intimidated by Ridley and, as Lindelof so elegantly put it, "just tried not to get fired."
Quote from: Deuterium on Oct 24, 2012, 02:15:34 AM
Quote from: Gash on Oct 23, 2012, 09:09:43 PM
I don't think Scott has changed his approach to actors, he built the sets and stop-gap visualisations for the benefit of a more 'real performance, and is still pulling tricks to keep actors on their toes.
But then, personally, I still feel that Prometheus - in parts - conveys a more 1970s feel than any other sci-fi film I've seen in years. Moon being another rare example.
Yes, I will definitely agree with "Moon". But then again, Sam Rockwell would still be interesting to watch if he was just reading a telephone directory. But yes, Duncan Jones and Sam Rockwell definitely captured that naturalistic dialogue and character interaction which seems to be so lacking in modern Hollywood cinema.
Often, the delivery of the dialogue is so precise and unnaturally fluid, it is like watching a tennis match from the judges stand. Back -- forth --back -- forth. Rinse and repeat. In real life, people don't converse and interact so mechanically.
Ultimately, what makes the "naturalistic" approach (for lack of a better word) so appealing to me, is the perceived spontaneity. Again, using "Alien", or "Close Encounters" as specific examples...the illusion that is created is:
a) The person speaking has literally just constructed, in their mind, what he/she is about to say, for the first time.
b) The person listening and receiving the dialogue has literally just heard it for the very first time.
Obviously, this is not an easy thing to pull off...and it takes very talented actors, and more often than not, an equally talented director to accomplish this. Of course, allowing the actors to do a certain amount of creative, freestyle ad-libbing, while still hitting all the critical, key "notes" of a given scene, greatly helps in this process.
Being "naturalistic", whilst it clearly has its place, is just one choice for the director. Hand held camera work helps a sense of naturalism, but it's use or none use doesn't automatically make a film superior or inferior. I'd agree that this technique adds to the films you mention (probably because it helps build tension and a sense of empathy) but there are many examples of poor films that try and be "naturalistic".
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 24, 2012, 04:36:14 AMRidley wanted everything exactly his way, and got it, so how brave do you have to be to start changing up the lines on your own if you're some of these lesser-known actors?
Fassbender did ad-lib a bit - the much disputed '36 hours' line was like a hot potato between Spaights and Lindelof with both claiming that it wasn't penned by them.
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Oct 24, 2012, 11:03:36 AM
Quote from: RagingDragon on Oct 24, 2012, 04:36:14 AMRidley wanted everything exactly his way, and got it, so how brave do you have to be to start changing up the lines on your own if you're some of these lesser-known actors?
Fassbender did ad-lib a bit - the much disputed '36 hours' line was like a hot potato between Spaights and Lindelof with both claiming that it wasn't penned by them.
... hm, I'm sure I saw Spaihts or someone saying it was intentional?
EDIT: Here we go: http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php (http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php)
Quote from: Valaquen on Oct 24, 2012, 11:09:19 AMEDIT: Here we go: http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php (http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php)
Rumor control, there are the facts. :D
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Oct 24, 2012, 11:14:19 AM
Quote from: Valaquen on Oct 24, 2012, 11:09:19 AMEDIT: Here we go: http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php (http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-writer-jon-spaihts-confirms-36-hours-plot-hole-was-deliberate.php)
Rumor control, there are the facts. :D
I try ;D
What if things had to be a certain way? Characters are not being portrayed badly, but the characters themselves are all portraying themselves falsely...
David is secretly the most real... his twitchy nature makes him more human than the humans of the story. He secretly displays more emotion than the subdued emotion/acting and fake personalities of the crew.
What if even if the actors could have improved their performance, Ridley made everyone minus Shaw and David tone down, or alter their normal acting style slightly... forcing the characters to use cliches that are all incredibly old by that point in the timeline... a culture that may have gone stale like the Engineers. Because Weyland gave them everything and rules like a king. They're all his subjects. Tools.
In some basic ways it's a lot like American Beauty where David=Lester. In American Beauty it's made out to make Lester appear as a somewhat bad guy responsible for all his own problems when you first watch it. If you dig deeper into the movie you realize Lester is trapped in a situation and it's the only reason he acts out irresponsibly. As a way to escape the miserable life he's trapped in. As much as Lester can't take control of his situation completely, or change it; it's the others around him who are also at fault and secretly more crazy than Lester appears to be. The wife drove him to his misery/actions. At the end his death is a misunderstanding caused by the father of the boy next door who he was only smoking pot with, and the father of the boy has serious issues. All the characters in the story except Lester have been adding to his inability to escape the situation and his breakdown. Here it would be all of the characters except Shaw and Janek who are secretly less real and more crazy than David...
We have to remember this is Ridley's vision of the future, plus the quotes Lindelof said about getting inside David's head and the "robot's perspective."
David subtly indicates he may want to kill his parents. There may be a reason for that.
He hates his parent-- the unjust king who forces him to do his evil bidding... as well as the culture he's been born into.
These are not colony born humans living out in space.
They've been directly under Weyland's rule as king for a very long time.
These characters were born into the culture Weyland helped shape and morph-- giving them all the answers, making them dependent on him as a leader. Portraying himself as a god.
It's a nature/nurture thing after David's birth. The characters are the way they are because they've lost their true selves, true emotions, and are less real than David/Fassbender.
Ironically David is becoming a "real boy" and Shaw and Janek are the only others who come close to being "real". With Vickers she pretends to be in control and emotionless, but hides her own unbalanced emotions, panic, fear, and risk aversion based emotions for the most part.
And there's something very different about most of the Earth-born humans of this time minus the above characters.
It's like people like Ford and Jackson are a little bit emotionless and a little bit too unthinking/obedient and unquestioning.
Holloway connects with his emotions too much, unlike the rest, but has major ego and false ego problems as well.
The characters' "fakeness" could be a reflection of Weyland's chaotic rule over the timeline. More so than that each character may be hiding their own full views and perspectives, agendas, and true nature. So the emotions they display on the surface are fake... David is actually becoming emotional... more human than the humans he's with.
The humans of the story can't even take care of themselves or respond logically and instinctively at the same time to either run away or fight the situation. This is displayed partially by Millburn's inability to control the situation(though he pretends he can) or even to simply run away (flight response). They've lost some of their survival instincts...
On one level David is absolutely telling the truth when he says to Shaw: "I didn't think you had it in you, poor choice of words"... because there are multiple meanings to this statement. Meaning on one hand that her survival instincts are impressive compared to the rest, although he could still be being sarcastic and is disappointed he was wrong about all humans, "not too close I hope". Her true logic and intuition/emotion combined in a way that leads her out of the situation. Her "realness"... She's different from the other humans he's grown to despise. There's a reason he says "parents (plural)" and only has the one closest thing to a father... again it's a nature/nurture thing and he sees his other parent as all of humanity. Possibly just the company, because he may have a pseudo-subconscious desire to replace his parent and become King... he feels superior to Weyland and humanity... A lot of Weyland rubbed of on him. More than the preference for Lawrence of Arabia...
He may actually be admiring Shaw's ability to go against Weyland's programming, but at the same time it's a poor choice of words because he's revealing he can lie. He had full knowledge that "it" was inside her in his other meaning.
He may also have a little respect for Shaw because she taught him to choose what to believe when he was watching her dream, which is how he lies and deceives-- choosing to remain vague throughout the entire movie.
The characters are all too egotistical, greedy, unable to see other perspectives, unable to connect with their emotions and intuition properly, semi-uncaring, fake, semi-unquestioning, and semi-emotionless because of Weyland's influence over the culture they were born into. A lot of it rubbed off on them because he's the parent of Vickers and David, and like the King of the culture for the rest. Even David may become like his father, like the father he hates, wanting to be a creator as our first near-immortal character of the story. "Sometimes to create one must first destroy". He's an android head that gets to keep living without anyone having to plug anything in or trick it into thinking it's alive again. David's head is immortal in a way that the later Androids aren't. The old order at Weyland corp is completely destroyed and begins to disintegrate when the King is killed and the Weyland lineage is severed.
There's something going on in David's head. Look at the early posters that focus on David, and the links between all the head themes become more apparent. The focus on David in general and how Fassbender came across as one of the best things in the movie should provide some clues that a lot of the series will be about David.
In the beginning we see Millburn using a different accent when conversing with Fifield for the first time. He later switches to trying to impress him when Fifield turns out to be not so tough. Millburn tries to impress Fifield and foolishly believes in his abilities/act enough to try to pretend he has the situation in control. He almost accesses his flight response when he almost backs away, but his false ego takes over and he goes forward thinking/believing what he says.. That it's mesmerized and he can handle it. But he really has no clue what he's doing.
Janek is the natural captain and leader but he purposely gives up control of situations sometime prior to the events of the movie, he "just flies the ship" but at the end Ravel or Chance (can't remember) reveals that he's a "shit pilot". It takes a long time for Janek to take charge of the situation but he makes the call Vickers couldn't make and Ravel and Chance stick by him. They believe he's right-- they're both betting on him...
And of course after the deleted scenes and all we know Janek may be almost entirely right with his view of it being a weapons facility, because of his past experiences and having been in situations where tough calls had to be made.
They're supposed to be acting like irrational, illogical morons at times who can't properly combine logic and intuition/instinct/emotion anymore to begin looking for evidence in the right directions. Because of Weyland's influence over the culture. As a king, as almost a dictator.
David is breaking free from what most humans from Earth are like at this point and in the future of the series. "Earth, what a shit-hole"