User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Daniel Twiss Talks Prometheus  (Read 39553 times)

Eva
May 23, 2012, 12:49:52 AM
Reply #75 on: May 23, 2012, 12:49:52 AM
Guys... the actor didn't say that
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

just pointing it out...  :)

« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 12:44:40 PM by Eva »

OpenMaw
May 23, 2012, 12:58:30 AM
Reply #76 on: May 23, 2012, 12:58:30 AM
I also agree with the fact that this is fiction, its a movie...there is fantasy in movies.  It is not like this is supposed to be a NOVA special about the search and possibilities for ET life.

I can agree with this sentiment, except when the film makers start saying things like "We're not just doing fiction, we're playing around with ideas that could be true." That's what Ridley has said, they're playing around within the truth of "what might actually be out there." Which is ridiculous.


Capovin
May 23, 2012, 01:53:32 AM
Reply #77 on: May 23, 2012, 01:53:32 AM
I also agree with the fact that this is fiction, its a movie...there is fantasy in movies.  It is not like this is supposed to be a NOVA special about the search and possibilities for ET life.

I can agree with this sentiment, except when the film makers start saying things like "We're not just doing fiction, we're playing around with ideas that could be true." That's what Ridley has said, they're playing around within the truth of "what might actually be out there." Which is ridiculous.

I can't watch the Sagan clip for some reason, but in regards to this, when did Ridley say this? I've heard him talking about big ideas and questions, but I always assumed it was along the lines of Blade Runner and such like what it means to be human.


OpenMaw
May 23, 2012, 02:17:42 AM
Reply #78 on: May 23, 2012, 02:17:42 AM
I can't watch the Sagan clip for some reason, but in regards to this, when did Ridley say this? I've heard him talking about big ideas and questions, but I always assumed it was along the lines of Blade Runner and such like what it means to be human.

In one of the featurettes he literally says something to the affect of "we're not just playing around with fiction, but what might actually be out there." I'll see if I can find it.

Ah, basically Carl shows us an experiment simulating early Earth atmosphere and how the elementary particles may have come together form the building blocks for early life, and to address what you said about it being uncommon. he says "Look how easy it is to make globs of the stuff." "All the materials are common throughout the universe." "Similar reactions must have occured on a billion different worlds."


hfeldhaus
May 23, 2012, 02:23:55 AM
Reply #79 on: May 23, 2012, 02:23:55 AM
I also agree with the fact that this is fiction, its a movie...there is fantasy in movies.  It is not like this is supposed to be a NOVA special about the search and possibilities for ET life.

I can agree with this sentiment, except when the film makers start saying things like "We're not just doing fiction, we're playing around with ideas that could be true." That's what Ridley has said, they're playing around within the truth of "what might actually be out there." Which is ridiculous.

That is a point, but what we are talking about is people going shit crazy in the forums and chatting shit about DNA and what not. I dont mind people analysing the film in anyway or giving their opinion, but when someone is silly enough to start   drivling on about how they dont think the film wont be any good because it not grounded in reality is pretty annoying and i doubt just for me


thecaffeinatedone
May 23, 2012, 02:29:30 AM
Reply #80 on: May 23, 2012, 02:29:30 AM
Am I the only one that can be pissed at the propagation of the Ancient Aliens ("seeding")myth as science, yet still be able to not give a shit if it's in a fictional story? :p I mean, I really don't care if it happens in the Alien Universe, just as long as it's not told shitty.


OpenMaw
May 23, 2012, 02:35:32 AM
Reply #81 on: May 23, 2012, 02:35:32 AM
Am I the only one that can be pissed at the propagation of the Ancient Aliens ("seeding")myth as science, yet still be able to not give a shit if it's in a fictional story? :p I mean, I really don't care if it happens in the Alien Universe, just as long as it's not told shitty.

That is a point, but what we are talking about is people going shit crazy in the forums and chatting shit about DNA and what not. I dont mind people analysing the film in anyway or giving their opinion, but when someone is silly enough to start   drivling on about how they dont think the film wont be any good because it not grounded in reality is pretty annoying and i doubt just for me


It's not that they've used AA as a basis for their story. Not for me anyway. I'm sure for Deuterium even that is too old hat and so forth. But I can deal with that. It's when I start hearing the writer, and the director saying that they buy into it, and they're trying to spin it as being a reality, and the movie is basically just a way for them to spread the gospel. That reeks a bit of being pretentious, and it could harm the movie if it becomes overly intrusive. Which, I really hope it's not.


thecaffeinatedone
May 23, 2012, 02:47:58 AM
Reply #82 on: May 23, 2012, 02:47:58 AM
I don't really think that will last though. Ridley is known to spout of like this from time to time. EDIT: Sorry, didn't see that Lindelof/Spaihts had bought into it too. Good god.  ::)

« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 02:51:24 AM by thecaffeinatedone »

Capovin
May 23, 2012, 02:51:21 AM
Reply #83 on: May 23, 2012, 02:51:21 AM
I can't watch the Sagan clip for some reason, but in regards to this, when did Ridley say this? I've heard him talking about big ideas and questions, but I always assumed it was along the lines of Blade Runner and such like what it means to be human.

In one of the featurettes he literally says something to the affect of "we're not just playing around with fiction, but what might actually be out there." I'll see if I can find it.

Ah, basically Carl shows us an experiment simulating early Earth atmosphere and how the elementary particles may have come together form the building blocks for early life, and to address what you said about it being uncommon. he says "Look how easy it is to make globs of the stuff." "All the materials are common throughout the universe." "Similar reactions must have occured on a billion different worlds."

Hmm I haven't seen that featurette. I actually completely buy what Carl Sagan's saying, but i was speaking more to the immense amount of coincidences that led to our existence, how unlikely it is for intelligent life such as us to exist I think Hawking said something to the effect of it being comparable to a Boeing 747 being reassembled in a tornado. It stands to reason that if we came from their DNA an evolved in a similar environment to theirs, we could eventually come to a species that looks somewhat like them.


Deuterium
May 23, 2012, 02:55:43 AM
Reply #84 on: May 23, 2012, 02:55:43 AM

That is a point, but what we are talking about is people going shit crazy in the forums and chatting shit about DNA and what not. I dont mind people analysing the film in anyway or giving their opinion, but when someone is silly enough to start   drivling on about how they dont think the film wont be any good because it not grounded in reality is pretty annoying and i doubt just for me

Hfeldhaus,

You do realize what the original topic of this post is about, right?  Specifically, the information conveyed in the interview with Daniel Twiss.  The discussion about evolutionary pathways, and the agent of inheritence (DNA) is kind of apropos...especially when someone with even a passing curiousity tries to reconcile:

Ancient alien "engineers" (which look remarkably human) -->
the seeding of biological Life -->
billions of years of evolution -->
resulting in humans (which look remarkably like the engineers).


thecaffeinatedone
May 23, 2012, 03:01:47 AM
Reply #85 on: May 23, 2012, 03:01:47 AM
Quote
Ancient alien "engineers" (which look remarkably human) -->
the seeding of biological Life -->
billions of years of evolution -->
resulting in humans (which look remarkably like the engineers).

You know, now that you put it that way, the 'theory' presented in the movie doesn't just sound like pseudo-science but derp-science.  :-[


hfeldhaus
May 23, 2012, 03:50:08 AM
Reply #86 on: May 23, 2012, 03:50:08 AM


Hfeldhaus,

You do realize what the original topic of this post is about, right?  Specifically, the information conveyed in the interview with Daniel Twiss.  The discussion about evolutionary pathways, and the agent of inheritence (DNA) is kind of apropos...especially when someone with even a passing curiousity tries to reconcile:

Ancient alien "engineers" (which look remarkably human) -->
the seeding of biological Life -->
billions of years of evolution -->
resulting in humans (which look remarkably like the engineers).

to be honest i just think your putting the emphasis too much on science when genre conveys we look at it in terms of fiction. i may have worded it wrong but i understood the DNA speak i just thought it was being taken too seriously and was affecting the way in which people thought about the film.


zuzuki
May 23, 2012, 04:33:22 AM
Reply #87 on: May 23, 2012, 04:33:22 AM

That is a point, but what we are talking about is people going shit crazy in the forums and chatting shit about DNA and what not. I dont mind people analysing the film in anyway or giving their opinion, but when someone is silly enough to start   drivling on about how they dont think the film wont be any good because it not grounded in reality is pretty annoying and i doubt just for me

Hfeldhaus,

You do realize what the original topic of this post is about, right?  Specifically, the information conveyed in the interview with Daniel Twiss.  The discussion about evolutionary pathways, and the agent of inheritence (DNA) is kind of apropos...especially when someone with even a passing curiousity tries to reconcile:

Ancient alien "engineers" (which look remarkably human) -->
the seeding of biological Life -->
billions of years of evolution -->
resulting in humans (which look remarkably like the engineers).
I don't think it's billions of years for one, and we don't know what exactly happens in that scene. They could have just told the actor: ''hey, so you drink this for a ritual then you enter the water and disolve so your dna can be the beggining of some kind of life''. But that doesn't mean that act actually created all of biological life on earth or was the beginning of the human species. I doubt Ridley told this insignificant actor who was only on set for a few days, what exactly this scene means, or how it connects to the rest of the movie. This considering the secretive nature of the movie and the filming process.


Deuterium
May 23, 2012, 04:55:44 AM
Reply #88 on: May 23, 2012, 04:55:44 AM
Guys... the actor didn't say that his characters sacrifice created the building blocks for all life 4 billion years ago. He said that his sacrifice created the building blocks for new lifeforms.

To add, from what I've read on the subject, Earth looked nothing like what the imagery suggests 4 billion years ago...

just pointing it out...  :)

I don't think it's billions of years for one, and we don't know what exactly happens in that scene. They could have just told the actor: ''hey, so you drink this for a ritual then you enter the water and disolve so your dna can be the beggining of some kind of life''. But that doesn't mean that act actually created all of biological life on earth or was the beginning of the human species. I doubt Ridley told this insignificant actor who was only on set for a few days, what exactly this scene means, or how it connects to the rest of the movie. This considering the secretive nature of the movie and the filming process.


Spoiler (click to show/hide)



 

Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube RSS Feed