Prometheus Footage Screening and Q&A

[Prime113]

100million+ opening weekend probably won't happen. I'm thinking, maybe, if the reviews and marketing are good, somewhere around 50 million.

[CanisMajoris]

Hmmm  I wish it was about two and half hours, but I wish that upon every movie I am excited for. 1:59 isn't bad, but you'll have to take away at least 7 minutes of credits, so we're down to 1:52, atleast. Nitpicking, I know.

Also, we have to remember that we are dealing with one of the greediest companies out there. I wouldn't put it past FOX to make Ridley cut it down 45 minutes or so to fit another showing in per day.

1:59 without credits..... but its still short....
avatar was 40 minute longer and it f$#ed up every single movie in BO....
just curious how they squeezed everything in 2 hours, but i feel i'll be disappointed.... 

[Prime113]

I see. 2 hours isn't THAT short, dude. They could pull an AVP and make it 90 minutes.

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

[CanisMajoris]

I see. 2 hours isn't THAT short, dude. They could pull an AVP and make it 90 minutes.

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

yeah... I could live with that....... if it was R..
I see they want to make as much money as possible, but making it shorter and + compromising the rating and watering it down is what I call a Fu$ed Up Movie.. 

BTW Ridley is sure that the runtime is perfect for this and it gives me some hope... but still 

[RoaryUK]

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

...surely you're not serious!!! 

[Prime113]

Ahh. Yes, Fu$ed up. Makes perfect sense.   

The PG-13 rating was pretty shitty, but hearing Ridley Scott, one of my inspirations, sell out was the hardest part. Damnit, Scott! 

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

...surely you're not serious!!! 

Surely you aren't. Look at Cameron's last two movies $$$$ wise, now look at Scott's.

[Valaquen]

Ahh. Yes, Fu$ed up. Makes perfect sense.   

The PG-13 rating was pretty shitty, but hearing Ridley Scott, one of my inspirations, sell out was the hardest part. Damnit, Scott! 

Well, even waaay back when he was promoting The Duellists, Scot in interviews claimed to make films for a wide audience. This continued throughout his career. There's just more people paying attention to what he says now.

[armageddon]

avatar was 40 minute longer and it f$#ed up every single movie in BO....

Granted, Avatar was a success but the story could have very easily been told in 2 hours.

[Prime113]

Well...Yeah, I understand that, and that's the way I want to be too, but he just came out and said "what's the point if no one would see it"  or something along those lines. People were going to see it no matter the rating. He could have stuck to his guns and made it R.

[Glaive]

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

...surely you're not serious!!! 

Yes, he IS serious.






...and DON'T call him Shirley.


...(someone had to...)

[Prime113]

Remember, Avatar had James Cameron, the beginning of the 3-D craze, and, well some other stuff I won't mention. Prometheus has Ridley Scott, yes, but his name isn't as automatic as Cameron(in the public eyes). And the 3-D might help it, but this isn't being released at the beginning of the current 3-D craze, its coming at the end.

...surely you're not serious!!! 

Yes, he IS serious.


...and DON'T call him Shirley.

...(someone had to...)

Damnit!  Wish I would'a thought of that. Nice one, Glaive.

[NGR01]

Hmmm  I wish it was about two and half hours, but I wish that upon every movie I am excited for. 1:59 isn't bad, but you'll have to take away at least 7 minutes of credits, so we're down to 1:52, atleast. Nitpicking, I know.

Also, we have to remember that we are dealing with one of the greediest companies out there. I wouldn't put it past FOX to make Ridley cut it down 45 minutes or so to fit another showing in per day.

Scott said it was 1H59 without the credits.
Again its all about execution.
Its the same with the rating.
Have a little faith fellows.

[Glaive]

But, SERIOUSLY, 2 hours is at least an extra screening (if not two) per screen, per cinema, per day...let THAT sink in...

[RoaryUK]

So, Ridley said that the runtime of the movie is 1:59 and its very tight an its what it should be...... he also said that there was a longer version of it (extra 17 minutes)
But I still can't believe how the EPIC movie with some huge thematic elements can be so "short"   

Yes, that's really disappointing, expected it to be 2 hrs 30 mins at least, especially for such a huge summer 3D blockbuster release. Then again, what with Rothman pushing for a PG-13 and all the hype FOX is putting behind this movie to put bums on seats, I'm probably not the only one here thinking maybe they've shown too much already. I wouldn't be suprised if this film was butchered for its theatrical release, but with home cinema systems so great these days as long as we get old Riddles' version at some point, I couldn't care less. 

[Prime113]

Hmmm  I wish it was about two and half hours, but I wish that upon every movie I am excited for. 1:59 isn't bad, but you'll have to take away at least 7 minutes of credits, so we're down to 1:52, atleast. Nitpicking, I know.

Also, we have to remember that we are dealing with one of the greediest companies out there. I wouldn't put it past FOX to make Ridley cut it down 45 minutes or so to fit another showing in per day.

Scott said it was 1H59 without the credits.
Again its all about execution.
Its the same with the rating.
Have a little faith fellows.

Oh, I have faith, man. Even with the less than ideal running time, and the PG-13 rating, I will be there Friday at noon with the biggest smile in the world on my face.