(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F5DqNb.jpg&hash=6716602fea20b2d8008059f0955575d6a0259beb)
CGI doesn't look perfect - so I can really see people either hating it or loving it.
Thanks for the Prometheus forum.
If posted already, I shall delete!
The cgi looks great ! Damn now i see this i would love to see the alternate scene and if it's good then maybe reinserted in a future extended cut.
f**king beast.
That's... pretty cool.
That's f**king awesome!
So much better than what we got in the film.
I'm telling you, whoever makes the decisions to change this shit are just huge idiots. ::)
That'd be Ridley.
Still don't think it was better. Just different.
Looks a bit ape-like.
It isn't "baby-face" from the Art of Prometheus book. So I'm not that annoyed it was cut.
I just want a better edited sequence when it attacks, dammnit.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 01:55:41 AM
That'd be Ridley.
Hmmm...should I change my opinion...hhhhhmmmmmmm
No. Wasn't saying you should, either. If you think the decision maker was an idiot, you think they're an idiot, regardless of who it was. Considering the rest of the movie, I'd agree.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 01:59:45 AM
No. Wasn't saying you should, either. If you think the decision maker was an idiot, you think they're an idiot, regardless of who it was. Considering the rest of the movie, I'd agree.
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
Hmm, that would have been scary. Instead we got a lame zombie guy.
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on Aug 27, 2012, 01:57:02 AM
I just want a better edited sequence when it attacks, dammnit.
This, and in its original place. Because goddamn it was poorly done in the movie. :\
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I think i know why they opted the scene out. His hands just never looked quite right. WTF is going on with those wrists buddy?
In the trailer in which this character can clearly be seen, I always thought something was f**ked up with them and they looked loopy and puppet like. To me it needed more work.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
Oh, I couldn't agree more.
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:13:17 AM
I think i know why they opted the scene out. His hands just never looked quite right. WTF is going on with those wrists buddy?
In the trailer in which this character can clearly be seen, I always thought something was f**ked up with them and they looked loopy and puppet like. To me it needed more work.
It just has very thin wrists. Which, actually, fit with the whole character...since he was tall with very elongated limbs.
It's a far sight better than Zombifield.
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours. arabic subtitles.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:14:59 AM
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Is that an insult?
no but your comment towards the film holds no merit unless you....figure it out. Why don't you post a topic about it rather than post a this (middle finger to the film) and then leave.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:16:02 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:14:59 AM
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Is that an insult?
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:17:12 AM
no but your comment towards the film holds no merit unless you....figure it out. Why don't you post a topic about it rather than post a this (middle finger to the film) and then leave.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:16:02 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:14:59 AM
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Is that an insult?
I didn't "give a middle finger to the film and walk away"...I'm still here.
And this definitely DOES NOT need another thread, there are plenty.
I know you like "artsy" stuff...but you should try being a bit less dramatic.
My comment is my opinion, and therefore it needs no other merit than what I give it.
I don't need to give it any more merit to make it reasonable to you...that would be ridiculous.
My opinion is just that...an opinion...you can take it or leave it...just like I do yours.
Someone liking the film while thinking it has problems = flipping it the middle finger?
How do people manage to cope with such black and white thinking...
Quote from: SM on Aug 27, 2012, 02:22:38 AM
Someone liking the film while thinking it has problems = flipping it the middle finger?
How do people manage to cope with such black and white thinking...
Exactly.
I liked the film...but it has pacing, editing and logic problems.
EDIT: Did Acrediblesource give me the "middle finger" and then leave? :laugh:
Its just that i don't understand why people could be down on this movie. I watched it alone lets just make that clear. And by the end it totally satified me as film goer.
If its logic, then clearly disgruntled people were wanting more of an explanation to a mystery that wasn't meant to be solved (hense its a mythology) or motives or emotions of the characters which to me, if the character left out a major development flaw it would be noted quite clearly. Remeber the spinning top in Inception? Well clearly if there were we'd have threads on it in the Prometheus forum which would be the clear mark of every freakin review out there (which there aren't).
I mean, if i weren't in the forums watching people bicker about their fustrations of 'not getting it' , I would have just read reviews ( only from reputable film sites), and not one of them took aim at any such flaws you speak of.
Pacing it seemed to me, worked well. Nothing glaringly obvious. I mean there wasn't a half hour of nothing.
And about this matter of pacing, the search for life on other planets (which consituted the first 15 minutes of the film) is not NOTHING. Its something that most people find intriguing.
Base your opinions on something, theres no shame in 'not getting it' if you don't understand planet finding, or ancient civilisations, or why someone would be overly exicited about lifeforms.
or you can just say 'I hate white people and think all of them are trash, thats just my opinion" and we'll end this discussion at that.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:20:20 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:17:12 AM
no but your comment towards the film holds no merit unless you....figure it out. Why don't you post a topic about it rather than post a this (middle finger to the film) and then leave.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:16:02 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:14:59 AM
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Is that an insult?
I didn't "give a middle finger to the film and walk away"...I'm still here.
And this definitely DOES NOT need another thread, there are plenty.
I know you like "artsy" stuff...but you should try being a bit less dramatic.
My comment is my opinion, and therefore it needs no other merit than what I give it.
I don't need to give it any more merit to make it reasonable to you...that would be ridiculous.
My opinion is just that...an opinion...you can take it or leave it...just like I do yours.
QuoteIf its logic, then clearly disgruntled people were wanting more of an explanation to a mystery that wasn't meant to be solved
No, that's just lazy writing. Not necessarily saying that's the case in Prometheus, but if you're going to pose questions and not provide answers, then you need to steer the audience towards possible answers, and let them work it out (or shoot two films back to back and chuck a big 'TO BE CONTINUED' on the end). If people believe this to be the case with Prometheus - fair enough. Personally I need to watch it afew more times to work out if that's valid.
QuoteBase your opinions on something
Many people do precisely that.
QuotePacing it seemed to me, worked well. Nothing glaringly obvious. I mean there wasn't a half hour of nothing.
Pacing is about flow, not about stuff happening. I didn't feel that parts of the film flowed particularly well. It's like the cocoon scene in Alien. Riddles was right to cut it, because it wrecked the flow of the climax of the film.
Quoteor you can just say 'I hate white people and think all of them are trash, thats just my opinion" and we'll end this discussion at that.
What's that got to do with anything?
I still don't get what you mean. ( which is my opinion and something said all to often).
Quote from: SM on Aug 27, 2012, 03:08:12 AM
QuoteIf its logic, then clearly disgruntled people were wanting more of an explanation to a mystery that wasn't meant to be solved
No, that's just lazy writing. Not necessarily saying that's the case in Prometheus, but if you're going to pose questions and not provide answers, then you need to steer the audience towards possible answers, and let them work it out (or shoot two films back to back and chuck a big 'TO BE CONTINUED' on the end). If people believe this to be the case with Prometheus - fair enough. Personally I need to watch it afew more times to work out if that's valid.
QuoteBase your opinions on something
Many people do precisely that.
QuotePacing it seemed to me, worked well. Nothing glaringly obvious. I mean there wasn't a half hour of nothing.
Pacing is about flow, not about stuff happening. I didn't feel that parts of the film flowed particularly well. It's like the cocoon scene in Alien. Riddles was right to cut it, because it wrecked the flow of the climax of the film.
Quoteor you can just say 'I hate white people and think all of them are trash, thats just my opinion" and we'll end this discussion at that.
What's that got to do with anything?
I'm guessing English isn't your first language?
Taken crack shots are you. Nuff.
Quote from: SM on Aug 27, 2012, 03:35:07 AM
I'm guessing English isn't your first language?
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:42:56 AM
Its just that i don't understand why people could be down on this movie. I watched it alone lets just make that clear. And by the end it totally satified me as film goer.
If its logic, then clearly disgruntled people were wanting more of an explanation to a mystery that wasn't meant to be solved (hense its a mythology) or motives or emotions of the characters which to me, if the character left out a major development flaw it would be noted quite clearly. Remeber the spinning top in Inception? Well clearly if there were we'd have threads on it in the Prometheus forum which would be the clear mark of every freakin review out there (which there aren't).
I mean, if i weren't in the forums watching people bicker about their fustrations of 'not getting it' , I would have just read reviews ( only from reputable film sites), and not one of them took aim at any such flaws you speak of.
Pacing it seemed to me, worked well. Nothing glaringly obvious. I mean there wasn't a half hour of nothing.
And about this matter of pacing, the search for life on other planets (which consituted the first 15 minutes of the film) is not NOTHING. Its something that most people find intriguing.
Base your opinions on something, theres no shame in 'not getting it' if you don't understand planet finding, or ancient civilisations, or why someone would be overly exicited about lifeforms.
or you can just say 'I hate white people and think all of them are trash, thats just my opinion" and we'll end this discussion at that.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:20:20 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:17:12 AM
no but your comment towards the film holds no merit unless you....figure it out. Why don't you post a topic about it rather than post a this (middle finger to the film) and then leave.
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:16:02 AM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 02:14:59 AM
So many problems that it only takes five or six times watching the Cam version to figure out right?
this. yours.
Quote from: SiL on Aug 27, 2012, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: Sabres21768 on Aug 27, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
I didn't realize you didn't like the film.
I need to read back through some of your posts, I'd love to see exactly what you didn't like about it.
I liked the film.
But it's got problems. So very many problems.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Is that an insult?
I didn't "give a middle finger to the film and walk away"...I'm still here.
And this definitely DOES NOT need another thread, there are plenty.
I know you like "artsy" stuff...but you should try being a bit less dramatic.
My comment is my opinion, and therefore it needs no other merit than what I give it.
I don't need to give it any more merit to make it reasonable to you...that would be ridiculous.
My opinion is just that...an opinion...you can take it or leave it...just like I do yours.
Your post is full of "it seems to me", "totally satisfied me", "to me, if", "I mean" and "I don't understand why"...
If you can't see the flaw in your judging my PERSONAL OPINION of a film, based on your own post...then my friend, you're not quite as insightful as you'd like to think you are...but that's just my opinion. ;)
Quote from: acrediblesource on Aug 27, 2012, 03:38:20 AM
Taken crack shots are you. Nuff.
Quote from: SM on Aug 27, 2012, 03:35:07 AM
I'm guessing English isn't your first language?
No, I was asking due to the fact that you post your quotes at the bottom of post rather than the usual way of posting them at the top.
Well that looks fantastic. Between what we've seen previously, and now this ... I'm starting to imagine the wonderfully rendered creature in motion. In all of his tortured, embryonic agony.
I hope this translucent outer flesh of his face jiggles appropriately like jelly fish.
Man, I would love to see this version of the scene, and like others have said, in the correct place.
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 27, 2012, 03:40:24 AM
Well that looks fantastic. Between what we've seen previously, and now this ... I'm starting to imagine the wonderfully rendered creature in motion. In all of his tortured, embryonic agony.
I hope this translucent outer flesh of his face jiggles appropriately like jelly fish.
Hell yeah...that's a great visual.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi162.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft253%2FLarsVader%2FTroll.png&hash=663348f638d4b54ce08858dda1a84c08a12fbedd)
Neato design.
Cant really decide between this one or the "belugga" head one that never left the concept art stage. They were all decent works...
maybe Ridles can use both in the sequel? Depending on how many mutants there are lol
At least with this one , it hints a little bit more at the possible outcome of infection where as the existing one still leaves you with the after thought of...
"WTF was that and why did it happen?"
This one is so much better than the one we got in the film! Ridley you moron.
The one we got looks like a zombie meatball boogie man.
This one looks more alienish. Far superior.
I don't like it.It seems too much Zombie for me ;It is not very bad either.I keep up with the current in the film.
It is a BETTER design. Why Ridley didn't choose this one is a big freakin mystery...
off-topic: but why the hell did he return to the ship and started to kill the poor innocent maintenance workers? what did they do wrong?
Quote from: zuzuki on Aug 27, 2012, 11:52:59 AM
off-topic: but why the hell did he return to the ship and started to kill the poor innocent maintenance workers? what did they do wrong?
His brain was breaking down. Being 're-made'. But his fragmented memories probably propelled him towards the ship ... the closest thing to 'home' the old Fifield knew.
Even before the contamination, Fifield was unhinged and probably a time bomb. Add the resentment of being 'left to die' by his shipmates and the painful reconfiguring of himself at a molecular level ... I'd say he had an axe to grind with his shipmates ...
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft2.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcStDdDGDPUsR_my_mT_u2N4B60TZvYGi_YiyapT9eLlTcxw31Jf%26amp%3Bt%3D1&hash=0519afa5eaacfc246c571ea7ac25ee44f31ec473)
I imagine this creature working really well with animatronic animations similar to those of Brundlefly. The eyes mainly. Picture its eyelids movig frenetically like that.
Quote from: samoht on Aug 27, 2012, 07:20:10 AM
The one we got looks like a zombie meatball boogie man.
I thought he resembled a hairy pizza with teeth, myself! :D
Quote from: Mr. Clemens on Aug 27, 2012, 02:31:55 PM
I thought he resembled a hairy pizza with teeth, myself! :D
Black goo pizza at the Engineer's!
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 27, 2012, 02:25:00 PMHis brain was breaking down. Being 're-made'. But his fragmented memories probably propelled him towards the ship ... the closest thing to 'home' the old Fifield knew.
So the alien DNA made him smarter and got him un-lost. Makes perfect sense... :P
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Aug 27, 2012, 02:39:15 PM
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 27, 2012, 02:25:00 PMHis brain was breaking down. Being 're-made'. But his fragmented memories probably propelled him towards the ship ... the closest thing to 'home' the old Fifield knew.
So the alien DNA made him smarter and got him un-lost. Makes perfect sense... :P
Took awhile for the pot to purge from his system. Plus ... who knows what type of newly forming senses he was experiencing. Perhaps a budding xenomorphic instinct.
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Aug 27, 2012, 02:37:33 PM
Quote from: Mr. Clemens on Aug 27, 2012, 02:31:55 PM
I thought he resembled a hairy pizza with teeth, myself! :D
Black goo pizza at the Engineer's!
Yep. Pretty much a burn victim with some cranial swelling ... and bad teeth.
Way too similar to something one would expect to see in The Lord of the Rings. I think a CGI rendered creature would have been much more criticised if it had appeared in the film.
Like the Trilobite and the Deacon (which did use animatronics but also used a lot of cgi), then?
Well, both were criticized (the Deacon in particular). :P
I personally really liked both, however. The Deacon especially.
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 27, 2012, 02:44:34 PMTook awhile for the pot to purge from his system.
Alien aggression + good old pot induced paranoia. I will watch the scene again with these things in mind...
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Aug 27, 2012, 02:47:34 PM
Like the Trilobite and the Deacon (which did use animatronics but also used a lot of cgi), then?
Yes.
Very creepy. Very scary. Very unused and very pissed off.
NECA needs to make a toy of this. I'd also the various conceptual designs of all the critters see the light of day, but that's a pipe dream.
Quote from: Hybrid King on Aug 27, 2012, 06:41:43 PM
NECA needs to make a toy of this. I'd also the various conceptual designs of all the critters see the light of day, but that's a pipe dream.
That's the Kothoga in your avatar, or Predator?
Quote from: Zenzucht on Aug 27, 2012, 06:55:02 PM
Quote from: Hybrid King on Aug 27, 2012, 06:41:43 PM
NECA needs to make a toy of this. I'd also the various conceptual designs of all the critters see the light of day, but that's a pipe dream.
That's the Kothoga in your avatar, or Predator?
A triple human/xenomorph/predator cross from some mental AVP comics. The avatar's of the thing that spawns them.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20100529033617%2Favp%2Fimages%2F5%2F54%2FAliens_vs_Predator_-_Deadliest_of_the_Species_-_hybrid_king.jpg&hash=ae09424e6bd12b03289c811bd94230cd224437e4)
Its better left out. stick to the pratical effets.
Why could't they have used this Weta version, but done it with real prosthetics and less CGI? Then everybody is happy.
The reason the CGI version was cut anyhow - too much detachment from original Fifield, risking confusing the audience, etc.
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on Aug 28, 2012, 12:14:00 AM
The reason the CGI version was cut anyhow - too much detachment from original Fifield, risking confusing the audience, etc.
Especially given how they eventually cut up the set piece in the end.
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on Aug 28, 2012, 12:14:00 AM
The reason the CGI version was cut anyhow - too much detachment from original Fifield, risking confusing the audience, etc.
Surely a few shots of a tattered space suit could have fixed that. Maybe they could have left the damaged, melted helmet on him... All I know is that I would love to see this version.
Reverse the situation and have this in the film and a still of the Fifield from the movie at the start of the thread and, no doubt people would still be complaining.
Maybe...Personally, I had no problem with the in film look. I just want to see this one in action after being teased with it.
"Risking confusing the audience"? That seems unlikely given how Ridley didnt give much of a f**k about answering Shaw's main question. Maybe Ridley just prefered the Fifield with the make up.
Quote from: Blacklabel on Aug 28, 2012, 12:54:47 AM
Maybe Ridley just prefered the Fifield with the make up.
I believe that's the case, yeah.
But those are two different types of confusion you're talking about there. There's a diffidence between confusing the audience about who a character is (when they should recognize it) and by purposefully leaving some questions open ended.
Fifield monster is wearing the fifield gear... it's Fifield.. I dont think the advanced mutation would have confused anyone :P
I like both versions personally.
Having the mohawk or a brief shot of his nametag would've alleviated any potential confusion no matter which design was used.
Quote from: Blacklabel on Aug 28, 2012, 01:18:37 AM
Fifield monster is wearing the fifield gear... it's Fifield.. I dont think the advanced mutation would have confused anyone :P
Gear? They all wear the same gear. Mohawk or any hints of red hair are all it would take.
Not even.
Janeck say's Fifield's camera is responding outside. We already know it's him.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fquotes.socialnetworkstuff.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fnotevenow_thuggndivas_quotes1.png&hash=23b4551e2d3c1cd3781e7371876e903dff7174b6)
Scene was cut for 2 reasons.
Way too intense for PG13 (wich was the original rating target but they ended up having an R).
Because this effects were used in the initial cut of the scene, where you can see Weyland and his team leaving to meet the Engineer.
Can't wait to see all the deleted scenes and the fanedits thats will put them all back in.
Quote from: eyeballkid on Aug 27, 2012, 02:09:51 AM
Hmm, that would have been scary. Instead we got a lame zombie guy.
I'm pretty sure this would've come across as much the same, too.
I still prefer that other one where his head is slightly elongated.
Quote from: Highland on Aug 28, 2012, 06:59:05 AMJaneck say's Fifield's camera is responding outside. We already know it's him.
Exactly. There is no justification for making him look like road kill.
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Aug 29, 2012, 01:47:44 PM
Quote from: Highland on Aug 28, 2012, 06:59:05 AMJaneck say's Fifield's camera is responding outside. We already know it's him.
Exactly. There is no justification for making him look like road kill.
Apart from the fact that it's a real actor performing under the makeup, which is rather horrific, rather than CGI Gollum...
Could've still made a better make-up design.
The design isn't too bad, the milky eye under a translucent shell is effective (the other eye less so) but the worry with CGI is movement. Even in the Weta still the tongue and teeth have that "I am Legend' look, so in that regard a guy in prosthetic make-up is preferable.
The problem with the scene is more to do with the fact that it takes place just after the editing of the film goes all minimalist.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F5DqNb.jpg&hash=6716602fea20b2d8008059f0955575d6a0259beb)
I've seen her at Walmart.
Quote from: Gash on Aug 29, 2012, 07:06:36 PMThe problem with the scene is more to do with the fact that it takes place just after the editing of the film goes all minimalist.
And that it has no purpose whatsoever. A balls-out monster might of lifted the scene a bit.
Well. it has the purpose of showing that Fifield has been totally f*cked up by his encounter with the black goo. His fate after what happened in the ampule room definitely needed to be seen so the film would be less effective without the scene.
It's starts off well with him in his weird position outside the ramp and is effectively violent, but you just know from trailer stuff that isn't in the final film that the whole scene was planned to be bigger. Janek calls to 'kill everything!' so we might assume the infection is spreading to the anonymous mercenaries and Shaw possibly crushes Fifield to death with the RV. Those extra scenes might have been dependent on the Weta Fifield though.
As it is it comes across as a good scene but at a stage where the flow of the story is suddenly rushed. It has some suspense, but not enough to be as effective as it could have been. IMHO.
Quote from: Gash on Aug 31, 2012, 05:51:13 PM
As it is it comes across as a good scene but at a stage where the flow of the story is suddenly rushed. It has some suspense, but not enough to be as effective as it could have been. IMHO.
I liked how the scene came right on the heals of the med pod sequence. The pace of those two scenes together was what I would have preferred for the whole last act. No time to catch your breath. Alas ... it just wasn't written that way.
Fifield just happening to show up as the team is about to go the temple with Weyland might have been too little too late and forced.
Him showing up earlier without crossing paths with Shaw and Weyland makes the scene feel more hectic and out of nowhere. Which is more in line with a scene that is dealing with 'side effects' and supporting characters. Plus I like the feeling that all hell is breaking loose inside and outside the ship. Again ... too bad they couldn't continued that feeling.
Quote from: Gash on Aug 31, 2012, 05:51:13 PMHis fate after what happened in the ampule room definitely needed to be seen so the film would be less effective without the scene.
As the film stands nothing really happened in the ampule room beyond him getting his face burned and falling over. Even when he inexplicably returns to the ship there is not much about him that suggests that anything 'alien' has happened - he still looks like someone who just got burned and fell over (apart from the crazy yoga pose).
If he had returned as a monster it might of been worthwhile IMO.
In my opinion Fifield should have been a stalker like creature. Showing up at the worse possible times during the movie to prevent the protagonists from doing what needed to be done. Each conflict would show a different Fifield mutating into a more lethal creature.
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Sep 04, 2012, 02:26:28 PM
Quote from: Gash on Aug 31, 2012, 05:51:13 PMHis fate after what happened in the ampule room definitely needed to be seen so the film would be less effective without the scene.
As the film stands nothing really happened in the ampule room beyond him getting his face burned and falling over. Even when he inexplicably returns to the ship there is not much about him that suggests that anything 'alien' has happened - he still looks like someone who just got burned and fell over (apart from the crazy yoga pose).
If he had returned as a monster it might of been worthwhile IMO.
Long limbs, super strength and the jumping/climbing ability of a large insect don't seem alien to you?
And we do see him fall into the black goo, so...
Quote from: Naissus on Sep 04, 2012, 02:31:14 PM
In my opinion Fifield should have been a stalker like creature. Showing up at the worse possible times during the movie to prevent the protagonists from doing what needed to be done. Each conflict would show a different Fifield mutating into a more lethal creature.
Yep - I could see that being interesting...
ridley probably just didnt like the look of the scene, maybe it didnt look right im pretty sure i read somewhere that it didnt look right in motion and ridley always says if you can do it live do it live so that was probably one of the main reasons
i thought the film was perfect the way it was personally im a huge prometheus fan.june 1st 2012 pretty much the most anticapated day of all time for me and prometheus is my favourite film of all time nothing negative to say about it whatsoever
we should be thankful we even get to see this stuff becauase the cinema cut was the ultimate cut of the film everything else we will get to see (dvd special features) will be awesome and is a gift for the fans ;D.
Not an incitement for people to moan about stuff
Quote from: PROMETHEUS IS AWESOME on Sep 04, 2012, 03:25:58 PMi thought the film was perfect [..] we should be thankful [..] a gift for the fans
Go roll your astro-turf somewhere else Damon. ;)
Kidding. Good on you for loving the film.
Quote from: Naissus on Sep 04, 2012, 02:31:14 PM
In my opinion Fifield should have been a stalker like creature. Showing up at the worse possible times during the movie to prevent the protagonists from doing what needed to be done. Each conflict would show a different Fifield mutating into a more lethal creature.
This is... f**king brilliant! Like Nemesis. God this movie whhyyy!?
I think the Nemesis/Resident Evil comparison is exactly why it'd be silly. Every time the plot takes a turn, Fifield shows up to smack it back down? People would be rolling in the aisles and the nerdrage we see in pockets would be even more intense. It turns into video game logic, which is what Nemesis operated on.
I would've liked more of the Fifield mutant, but him dropping in and out like the ninja from The Pink Panther (who would constantly reappear to attack his boss to 'keep my skills up') would be hilarious.
I was thinking more like the Alien in Alien.