Ridley Scott talks Prometheus 2

Started by zuzuki, Oct 12, 2012, 06:12:16 AM

Author
Ridley Scott talks Prometheus 2 (Read 26,639 times)

zuzuki

zuzuki

    What made you want to tackle sci-fi again?
    I hadn't done sci-fi for so long and  I enjoyed doing it. Plus, when it comes to the Alien world, no one else had addressed the origin question and I thought that was interesting to tackle. Prometheus evolved into a whole other universe. You've got a person [Noomi Rapace's Elizabeth Shaw] with a head in a bag [ Michael Fassbender's David] that functions and has an IQ of 350. It can explain to her how to put the head back on the body and she's gonna think about that long and hard because, once the head is back on his body, he's dangerous.

    So that's the sequel?
    [Laughs] I wish it was that easy. They're going off to paradise but it could be the most savage, horrible place. Who are the Engineers?


http://latino-review.com/2012/10/11/ridley-scott-confirms-blade-runner-2-talks-prometheus-sequel/

Jango1201

Jango1201

#1
Interesting way to get the ball rolling on the story I guess.
Harrison Ford's character was a replicant?

ChrisPachi

QuoteIt can explain to her how to put the head back on the body and she's gonna think about that long and hard because, once the head is back on his body, he's dangerous.

I am not sold on the idea of David being dangerous. Everything he does in the film is in pursuit of Weyland's goal. Sure, he has his own quirks and nuances, but not a single one of his actions betrays any kind of 'personal' agenda. If such a character aspect is implied then it is not expressed on screen very effectively.

Gash

Gash

#3
I'd describe David as naive and inquisitive. Hyper intelligent whilst childlike. I think he's potentially dangerous because he doesn't have the Asimov laws that most other film androids appear to have. He'll do things because the outcome could be interesting. Unfortunately David's had a bad tutor in Weyland and that might be hard to shake off.

whiterabbit

I'd put that head in a jar.



Although I take it that without Papa Weyland, David has free will.

Space Sweeper

He has no reason to directly harm her, anyways. I mean, sure, he'll definitely put her in harm's way, even directly betray her to pursue his interests, but he'd never just attack her for no reason. Now that Weyland is gone, his own curiosity is what will drive him. I always like to think that the only reason David warned Shaw about the Engineer was because he knew she was his only hope of being extracted, not because he simply wanted to preserve her life.

Quote from: whiterabbit on Oct 12, 2012, 11:10:22 AM
Although I take it that without Papa Weyland, David has free will.
And I doubt that free will comes with a conscience.

ChrisPachi

Quote from: Space Sweeper on Oct 12, 2012, 11:15:33 AMI mean, sure, he'll definitely put her in harm's way, even directly betray her to pursue his interests

That's the thing though - I don't get the impression that he has his own interests. Maybe someone can point it out to me, but to my mind everything David does is in service of Weyland's goals. The only subterfuge he really shows is directed at Vickers, and that was no doubt at Weyland's direction also.

LarsVader

LarsVader

#7
He's just curious.
Curiosity killed the cat.

whiterabbit

whiterabbit

#8
Quote from: Space Sweeper on Oct 12, 2012, 11:15:33 AM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Oct 12, 2012, 11:10:22 AM
Although I take it that without Papa Weyland, David has free will.
And I doubt that free will comes with a conscience.
Exactly. Was David programed with a conscience? Some sort of artificial protocol? For example when asked by Shaw, "What happens when weyland is not around to program you"; David says "I suppose I'll be free". Shaw responds with "you want that". To which David then says "want", "not a concept I'm familiar with, that being said, doesn't everyone want their parents dead?"

There appears to be no conscience there but does that mean he can't grow one? Also, is that something that can be learned by a machine? I think that is important to whether or not to screw his head back onto his body. A robot that does not know why he wants something, yet obviously does "want" things. It's a dilemma that terminators face after completing a mission to which the answer is deactivation. Yet there appears to be no mission to complete once Weyland is dead. Which is why David had to have his head torn off plot wise. He wouldn't need anyone's help otherwise. Which would have made Shaw expendable in my opinion.

samoht

samoht

#9
David mentions that something is "From a movie I like". He obviously has a concept of 'like'. Maybe he has a conscience of sorts. I'd prefer it if he did.

Cal seems to have a conscience. She's so moody and she thought she was a human and got all shitty about being a robot.

Kol

Kol

#10
Quote from: samoht on Oct 12, 2012, 01:03:10 PM
David mentions that something is "From a movie I like". He obviously has a concept of 'like'. Maybe he has a conscience of sorts. I'd prefer it if he did.

Cal seems to have a conscience. She's so moody and she thought she was a human and got all shitty about being a robot.

although, i like winona ryder, she was the worst robot ever. i saw none robotic behaviour in her acting.

whiterabbit

whiterabbit

#11
Yea, supposedly he can't, or is it doesn't "want" to be disappointed. Yet it is clear he understands what it means to be disappointed and what to want something is. I guess it all falls back to, what is a soul. Clearly as children most of us are taught that killing is wrong. For example. However that education or train of thought is quickly undone in military training. So what does it mean to have a soul? To feel guilty? Is that enough?

Quote from: Kol on Oct 12, 2012, 01:27:39 PM
Quote from: samoht on Oct 12, 2012, 01:03:10 PM
David mentions that something is "From a movie I like". He obviously has a concept of 'like'. Maybe he has a conscience of sorts. I'd prefer it if he did.

Cal seems to have a conscience. She's so moody and she thought she was a human and got all shitty about being a robot.

although, i like winona ryder, she was the worst robot ever. i saw none robotic behaviour in her acting.
Well what else did you expect from a robot designed and built by other robots. :laugh: :P

HUGZZ

HUGZZ

#12
Quote from: LarsVader on Oct 12, 2012, 11:30:49 AM
He's just curious.
Curiosity killed the cat.
Curiosity could have also killed the Cats friend, do none of you remember when David opened the door, without having any idea about what was behind it? Or how he picked Hollaway of all people to test the Black Goo on (probably because Hollaway was cruel to him, meaning it was a choice and wasn't just based on specific orders) just saying :/

Space Sweeper

Quote from: Kol on Oct 12, 2012, 01:27:39 PM
although, i like winona ryder, she was the worst robot ever. i saw none robotic behaviour in her acting.
What? Her acting bled robotic.

Byohzrd

Byohzrd

#14
Quote from: LarsVader on Oct 12, 2012, 11:30:49 AM
He's just curious.
Curiosity killed the cat.

nope still kickin somewhere.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News