Directed by: Ridley Scott
Starring: Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, Guy Pearce, Logan Marshall-Greene
Enough with all the coyness—yes, this is a prequel to Alien. However, it’s the kind of prequel where, yeah, you’ll get the connection if you know the first film, but, you don’t need to get it in order to understand the plot. That’s smart (though, in truth, I doubt the interest from people who’ve never seen Alien is very strong), but it’s the kind of smart that also keeps Prometheus from being the “great” film Ridley Scott was obviously trying for. It’s apparent that Scott was hoping to make a sci-fi picture that is also an “important” statement that explores big themes—and which has that enduring impenetrable mystery of Kubrick’s 2001 (with maybe a dash of Malick’s Tree of Life). The problem is that Scott is too much of a professional popularizer to make that leap of faith—in himself and in his audience—to pull it off. Prometheus—whatever its merits—isn’t taking any real chances.
We get a workable basic concept of following what appear to be guideposts left on Earth by ancient aliens works—which somehow skirts the feel of crackpot “ancient aliens” speculative TV shows. But what makes the film successful is the quality—and effectiveness—of the very spectacle laid out for us. And there Prometheus—whether you attribute it to Scott or to the production designers and effects technicians—scores very nicely. It’s also nice to see a big movie that doesn’t feel the need to climax with some kind of gigantic battle. Oh, sure, there’s an exciting climax with the requisite peril and explosions, but it’s geared toward story, character and concept—not just the need for a big ending. Will it spawn a sequel? Well, it’s certainly pitched to one, but it has the wisdom to have a self-contained ending. Is it short of greatness? Yes, but it’s still an impressive show.
While Scott’s attempt may fall short, he has made an entertaining, fast-moving, good-looking film that at least flirts with big questions. That it’s fast-moving is no small feat when you consider that it’s not really an action-oriented film, being more interested in mood, atmosphere and theme. It doesn’t even rely on the stock false scare techniques of Scott’s own 1979 Alien—and that’s partly the result of Scott’s desire that the film should be more than an exercise in sci-fi horror. (In that regard, at least, it’s a more original movie experience—whether it’s a more effective one is undoubtedly a personal call.)
For instance, I’m not skeptical about the idea that the big scientific force behind the story might have strong religious beliefs. That Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) is a Christian is fine. That she not only makes supposedly scientific decisions based on what she “chooses to believe” isn’t, and it’s even harder for me to swallow that a huge corporation backs her theory founded on that basis. I get that it’s all about the film’s desire to explore the nature of faith, but it’s not really explored—merely stated. That the film ends in a way that suggests a subsequent film (or films) will explore it is—at this point—something of a side issue.
Now, if you want to pick other aspects of the movie’s plot apart, it’s certainly possible—and casting Guy Pearce (under gobs of makeup) as the incredibly old corporate head Peter Weyland just feels like a stunt. But it’s overall solid enough for purposes of drama. Most of the characters are pretty well defined, but Rapace’s Shaw and Michael Fassbender’s android, David, are the standouts. Fassbender gets the best of the film, evidencing both a charismatic appeal and an air of suavely sinister villainy at the same time. In fact, the whole film is worth watching for his performance. Rated R for sci-fi violence including some intense images, and brief language.
Commenters email addresses are never displayed. Do not insert HTML code.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (without http://) and it will be active.
|
casting Guy Pearce (under gobs of makeup) as the incredibly old corporate head Peter Weyland just feels like a stunt. I suspect we’ll be seeing Guy Pearce as a younger man in a flashback scene at some point should there be a sequel. On the whole I was very impressed with the movie and enjoyed it enough that I’ll be heading out to see it again before long. |
 Jun 12, 2012 at 3:48 PM |
|
I bloody hope so. He’ll be feeling a bit gypped over the five hour makeup process otherwise. |
 Jun 12, 2012 at 4:51 PM |
|
I’m sure he was nicely compensated for the five hour makeup process. |
Jun 12, 2012 |
|
I suspect we’ll be seeing Guy Pearce as a younger man in a flashback scene at some point should there be a sequel. Count on it. Lance Henriksen did three Alien movies in the Bishop/Weyland role. |
 Jun 12, 2012 at 7:30 PM |
|
Having done some research, it appears that several scenes of Pearce as a younger version of his character were shot and then later cut from the film. They may wind up on the DVD. |
Jun 13, 2012 at 5:23 AM |
|
“They may wind up on the DVD.” Or in the sequel. |
Jun 13, 2012 at 8:08 AM |
|
Yeah, I could see an extended version clocking in at 150 minutes or so. Any guesses whether or not Janek visits Vickers’ quarters and puts to bed any remaining speculation (apparently it’s out there) that she may in fact be a robot? |
Jun 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM |
|
I liked this quite a bit. Is it too early to predict an Oscar nomination for Fassbender? His performance was inspired and they still owe him one for SHAME. |
 Jun 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM |
|
I don’t even remember who won. |
Jun 13, 2012 |
|
(though, in truth, I doubt the interest from people who’ve never seen Alien is very strong) I think I’ve seen ALIEN, although it was so long ago I don’t remember much about it and it may have been one of the sequels. I saw this mainly on the strength of the cast - Elba, Theron, Fassbender, Rapace, Pearce. |
Jun 14, 2012 at 5:09 AM |
|
Believe it or not, you’re pretty far removed the average moviegoer. |
Jun 14, 2012 |
|
Believe it or not, you’re pretty far removed the average moviegoer. Surely you jest. |
Jun 14, 2012 at 3:48 PM |
|
Believe it or not, you’re pretty far removed the average moviegoer. Surely you jest. |
Jun 14, 2012 at 3:48 PM |
|
“Surely you jest.” Don’t call him Shirley… That joke isn’t as funny in print for some reason. |
Jun 14, 2012 at 4:01 PM |
|
I’m jest trying to break it to you gently. Don’t make me tell you twice. |
Jun 14, 2012 |
|
That joke isn’t as funny in print for some reason. It’s really not that funny period. |
Jun 14, 2012 |
|
Wow. Just got home, & I want to see this movie again. That hardly ever happens. |
Jun 16, 2012 at 8:26 PM |
|
Once was more than enough for me. |
 Jun 16, 2012 at 1:08 PM |
|
I am supposing you weren’t one of its greater admirers. |
Jun 16, 2012 |
|
It was fine. Had poor plotting, good f/x, mediocre monsters, an absurd, yet beautiful beginning, which, as I’ve been thinking about it, could have been easily fixed by having ape creatures downstream. I just have no desire to see it again. Except maybe to tivo it and fast-forward to Fassbender’s parts. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 6:20 AM |
|
I’ll admit that the story strained credibility on a couple of points, the main one being that Weyland would mount this trillion-dollar mission, yet keep it’s purpose a secret from the idiots who would screw it up by accident or moralists who would do it on purpose once they find out what it’s really about. Other than a few things like that, I thought the story was elegant and the f/x spectacular. Noomi Rapace would not have been my first choice to anchor a new reluctant-female-adventure-heroine franchise like Sigourney Weaver did for Alien, but I came away believing she can pull it off. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 7:25 AM |
|
Ken and I pretty much always disagree on whether a science fiction film should be as scientifically accurate as possible. It bugs me when it’s not; him, not so much. Nigel Kneale did a much better job in QUATERMASS AND THE PIT, and that was 45 years ago. It just doesn’t take that much effort for a writer to do his/her homework! |
Jun 17, 2012 at 8:09 AM |
|
Noomi Rapace would not have been my first choice to anchor a new reluctant-female-adventure-heroine franchise like Sigourney Weaver did for Alien, but I came away believing she can pull it off. Considering the spectacular drop in box office from week one to week two, I question if a franchise is a sure thing. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
Ken and I pretty much always disagree on whether a science fiction film should be as scientifically accurate as possible. It bugs me when it’s not; him, not so much. Nigel Kneale did a much better job in QUATERMASS AND THE PIT, and that was 45 years ago. Meh. That has nothing to do with why I like <i>Quatermass and the Pit</b>. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
Considering the spectacular drop in box office from week one to week two, I question if a franchise is a sure thing. It’s a different landscape from 1979, that’s for sure. Alien raised the bar for sci-fi/horror, and it takes more to impress these days. I hope they do make a sequel. Heck, they’re exhuming Arrested Development for a movie, and making a sequel to Anchorman. All the good ideas must have been done. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 9:16 AM |
|
Alien raised the bar for sci-fi/horror, and it takes more to impress these days. I wasn’t that impressed with Alien in 1979, but I don’t know that I think it takes more to impress these days. If that was the case, we wouldn’t have the Transformers and Twilight movies. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
I suspect we’ll be seeing Guy Pearce as a younger man in a flashback scene at some point should there be a sequel. Here he is. Ridley Scott planted a clue in the final seconds of the Prometheus credits. If you follow it, it leads you to this: http://www.whatis101112.com/ I didn’t figure that out myself, btw. I got it here: http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/prometheus-credits-tag-leads-to-a-new-viral-site-weyland-video/ |
Jun 17, 2012 at 9:28 AM |
|
“I wasn’t that impressed with Alien in 1979” I got prepped for Alien the same way I think a lot of sci-fi heads did in 1979 - they did a big spread previewing Alien & the production art behind it in the magazine Heavy Metal. For sci-fi comic fans, knowing that elements of the design were done by H.R. Giger and the great Mobius himself, it was hard to not be excited. Of course, that sort of unconventional movie marketing is old hat, now… |
Jun 17, 2012 at 9:40 AM |
|
Oh, Alien was just as promoted in the film magazines at the time—back when all good film nerds read Film Comment and American Film—in large part because Scott was considered a pretty big deal owing to The Duellists (which I’ve still never seen). The Giger art was a part of it, too. And a big deal was made over the way Scott got the look of his sets by hazing them up with incense. It all sounded pretty darn interesting. Then I saw it and, to me, what I got was an expensive redo of It! The Terror from Beyond Space and a lot of stock false scare “boo” effects (including the hoariest of them all, false-scare-by-cat). It did look nice, though. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
Meh. That has nothing to do with why I like Quatermass and the Pit. I didn’t think it would, but Kneale lifted the whole movie out of the usual SciFi hum-drum. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM |
|
No argument there, but not because he used better science. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
No, because he was a better writer who used more plausible science. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 11:29 AM |
|
Maybe it was because he disliked science fiction altogether that his take feels fresh. Plausible has nothing to do with its appeal for me. |
Jun 17, 2012 |
|
The plausibility of his work always appealed to me because he would start with an idea that had nothing to do with science fiction, but something to do with the human element, to which he would work in the science and fictional elements and end up with a product that while being classed as science fiction was at it’s heart a well written drama. It’s the same with Harlan Ellison, who I realize many people dislike because he can be such an asshole. But many of his stories that are classed as science fiction or fantasy are basically stories about human frailties and ugliness that he put in a science-fictional situation, but the human element is always the most important, as was Kneale’s better works. |
Jun 17, 2012 at 1:13 PM |
|
http://io9.com/5919306/another-theory-about-the-meaning-of-prometheus |
 Jun 18, 2012 at 7:09 PM |
|
“...an expensive redo of It! The Terror from Beyond Space” Yep, that is how I perceived the movie when I saw it way back when. I liked ‘Aliens’ a lot better; in fact, of the series, IMO, it was the best of the bunch. Gee, I really hope none of the ‘out of fresh ideas’ film makers try and remake them. |
 Jun 19, 2012 at 4:40 AM |
|
I liked ‘Aliens’ a lot better; in fact, of the series, IMO, it was the best of the bunch That far I can’t go. And I liked Alien Resurrection better than any of them. |
Jun 19, 2012 |
|
“And I liked Alien Resurrection better than any of them.” I admit this surprises me; I thought it was by far the weakest of the series. It seemed lifeless and devoid of any real excitement to me. It played (again, just one person’s opinion) as a ‘let’ go through the motions and churn out another for some quick cash’ movie. |
Jun 19, 2012 at 7:26 AM |
|
I think I’ve told this story before, but oh well. In 1990, I was in Prague. I was walking around the new high-end shopping district late one night, in the snow. I came upon a shop window filled with the biggest TVs I had ever seen at the time. All of them were showing the movie Alien. Standing in front of the window was this giant man, wearing a cloth cap and a worn trenchcoat. Standing there, he looked a like a caricature of a newly-emancipated Eastern European in shock at the flood of commercialism from the west. I walked up in the snow to stand next to him & marvel at the giant TVs. He looked at me, started to look away & then did a double-take. He looked back at the TVs, and then turned & stared back at me. Only then did I remember that I had on my Alien baseball cap, which was exactly the same as the ones the characters on the giant TV screens were wearing. All this happened in complete silence, and I watched him shake his head & walk away… Poor guy - to this day I wonder what sort of kink I put on his brain with that stupid hat… |
Jun 19, 2012 at 7:27 AM |
|
”“And I liked Alien Resurrection better than any of them.” “I admit this surprises me; I thought it was by far the weakest of the series.” I agree with Di. Alien Resurrection seemed crass to me, especially after Sigourney Weaver famously insisted that her character Ripley get killed off in Alien3, because she didn’t want to see her get exploited ad nauseum. Then comes that bastard Joss Whedon with a clever “let’s clone Ripley” script, and they offered Weaver $11 mil to wake up & kill the bad monsters one more time… All that being said, I liked some things about it, and thought it hilarious that they hired Jean Jeunot to direct. He brought french actor Dominic Pinon along with him. And Dan Hedaya was great as the psycho commander, I thought… |
Jun 19, 2012 at 7:47 AM |
|
I think you’re near the crux of why I liked it the best. I’m putting it in context of Jeunet’s filmography more than the series of movies. That may seem wrong if you liked the series, but I wasn’t impressed by the first, was bored by the second (believe it or not, that’s possible), and hated the third, so I had nothing invested in it. |
Jun 19, 2012 |
|
I can see that. Sandwiched between City of Lost Children (which also starred Ron Perlman alongside Pinon), and Amelie, Alien Resurrection was an interesting diversion. Now, if they had cast Audrey Tautou in A.R. instead of Winona Ryder, then you’d have had something. |
Jun 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM |
|
You can’t have it all, alas. |
Jun 19, 2012 |
|
Don’t call me Alas. |
Jun 19, 2012 at 10:48 AM |
|
Mildly more amusing. |
Jun 19, 2012 |
|
We’re sorry to bother you at such a time like this, Mrs. Twice. We would have come earlier, but your husband wasn’t dead then. |
Jun 21, 2012 at 5:04 PM |
|
“Hey wait a minute, cops - is this some kind of bust?” “Yes, they’re very impressive. But that’s not important right now.” |
Jun 21, 2012 at 5:49 PM |
|
A brief sociopolitical synopsis of the “Alien” series. Alien(1970s): inconveneint little stinker bursts from your belly making life all messy. Men fail to cope and only a strong woman can clean up the mess. Feminists stand and applaud. Aliens(1980s): typical male solution to monster problem, “Send in the Marines!” Again, only a woman forklift driver can deal. Feminists stand and applaud. Alien3 (1990s): All the men are in prison and only a woman, in a moment that equates messy childbirth with messianic sacrificial crucifixion, can save the day. Feminists stand and applaud. Alien Ressurection (2000s): “an inconvenient monster” with a human head must be defeated by his mommy and her girlfriend while orbitng Toilet Earth. Al Gore and Ellen Degeneres lead the applause. Prometheus (2010s): alien engineers as non-traditional parents declare to their dysfunctional children “I brought you into this universe, and I can take you out!”. Feminists protest that the heroine is straight, married, Christian and too damned cute!
|
Big Al Jun 22, 2012 |
|
Um, Ripley (as played by Sigourney Weaver) was only ever portrayed as straight. She seduced the male doctor in Alien3. And there was nothing resembling romance between her clone and the android played by Winona Ryder in Alien Resurrection.
|
Jun 22, 2012 at 5:26 PM |
|
And there was nothing resembling romance between her clone and the android played by Winona Ryder in Alien Resurrection. And it’s our loss that there wasn’t!
|
Jun 23, 2012 at 2:49 AM |
|
Always the intellectual. |
Jun 23, 2012 |
|
I gotta be me! |
Jun 23, 2012 at 4:16 PM |
