Originals WTF? La Culture Geekery WWJD? The South Blog

Go see "Prometheus" for the special effects...

Food, Travel, Arts, and Pop-Culture

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:28 pm

... and that's pretty much it.

I went to see this movie by Ridley Scott, attempting to revive the "Alien" franchise with a cool, creepy "prequel." While I have to admit that visually, this was an engaging film, and would most likely have looked even better had I gone to the 3D version, I gotta say that the top-notch production values pretty well stopped at my retinas and eardrums.

The plot. meant to get at some basic questions about the origins of the alien, was rather thin and dull, IMO. The characters were mere cardboard cutouts, placeholders for the standard folks that inhabit such films. Not a one of them had a real personality written for them. It just does not cease to amaze me that the talent that created the first two films of this series has managed to misfire, rather badly, on the rest of the films.

As for some specific plot points that annoyed me (yeah... I"m writing spoilers from this point, though I seriously don't expect anyone to feel disappointed), there were a few.

1) Not only was I tired of seeing yet another "sinister robot" in this movie, but I was rather upset that his hostile actions went nearly completely unexplained. Oh, they tried to give a lame-ass explanation of how he had developed a misanthropic attitude toward all humans while wondering why he was created... but that really wasn't very sensible. And his change of heart toward the final human survivor made zero sense at all.

2) The explanation of "the engineers created humanity then turned out to hate humanity" should have been explained.

3) The many twists that they gave to the life cycle of these "biological weapons" were just confusing, more than frightening.

4) The plot point where the movie's main heroine endured an emergency, automated operation to remove a you-know-what from her uterus while staying awake AND directing the operation was stupid enough, but to see her stapled back together after being sliced pretty well in two, then going on to do her action-hero bit at the end... that REALLY pissed me off. Having endured a similar experience last year, and knowing the extreme pain that just a few TINY incisions through the abdominal wall result in, I could not suspend my disbelief to accept her actions for the rest of the film, I do not care WHAT dosage of PCP she might have had during the "operation."

So I'd have to say: yeah, there were a lot of very cool sights in the film. But if you want a story attached to it, one that hangs together reasonably well... you may as well forget it.
:cry:
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:43 pm

I assume Sigourney isn't in it?

I love Ridley Scott and his Alien was landmark, but this film is nothing without Weaver in it.

And before you say it. She's not too old. With CGI and all that today, they could have done it.
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:30 pm

It being a prequel, set a century or so before the original story, Sigourney Weaver would be rather hard to explain. Charlize Theron is in the film, but I never saw much reason for her to be in it...
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:39 pm

Time travel!
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Sat Jun 09, 2012 4:16 pm

Yeah... I don't think so.

Saw some reviews of the movie linked via Rotten Tomatoes. I thought it was rather interesting that a) RT had a rating of 74% positive reaction from critics, and b) this review was listed as "positive" -- but reading it sue looked to me like the guy hated the movie.

So I have to wonder just how accurate Rotten Tomatoes is in putting together its meta-scores, and if they err on these ratings often.
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Sat Jun 09, 2012 4:25 pm

It looks good on the trailer, but considering the amount of complete crap coming out of Hollywood lately (cough, Battleship)... I lack high hopes.

Not to mention this is a franchise from my youth, and Hollywood has destroyed most of that for me.

Now I hear they're doing a Nightmare on Elm Street 2, re-do?

Puleeze.... can we have some originality again?
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:56 pm

There is PLENTY of originality out looking for buyers. I'm a fairly good example. But no one who produces movies or publishes books is much interested in it. I'm hoping to be "discovered" some day... guess I should start writing for the Huffington Post.
:twisted:
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.


Return to La Culture