Prometheus *SPOILERS FROM POST 1538*

Mellor

pixelburp wrote: »

Well there's the final piece of proof then; if Pearce's name wasn't an obvious clue, then the logo at the end of that viral pretty much confirms the link with the Alien universe. Really don't see the point in remaining coy about the movie at this stage:

Proof?
Its never been a secret. They confirmed all along that it takes place in the Aliens Universe. The Space Jockey was mentions repeatedly.
They just were clear to distance it from the xenomorphs, chestbursters, facehuggers etc and the expectation that goes with that. It's a different, earlier mythology altogether.

pixelburp

Mellor wrote: »

Proof?
Its never been a secret. They confirmed all along that it takes place in the Aliens Universe. The Space Jockey was mentions repeatedly.
They just were clear to distance it from the xenomorphs, chestbursters, facehuggers etc and the expectation that goes with that. It's a different, earlier mythology altogether.

Dunno what interviews you're thinking of, but from the very get-go, Scott and co. have been coy about revealing just how or if Prometheus was related to the Alien universe. Before the first trailer hit, nobody knew for certain, and even after it aired the production team have refused to be drawn. They tended to talk about the new film having a similar 'DNA' and that was about it.

Sad Professor

I think when the film was first announced in January or thereabouts last year there was initially a lot of ambiguity about whether it was set in same universe as Alien. But by the summer both Scott and Lindelof had clarified that it was indeed set in the same universe. The DNA comments mostly referred to how the film connected with the '79 film or more specifically the xenomorph.

Mellor

pixelburp wrote: »

Dunno what interviews you're thinking of, but from the very get-go, Scott and co. have been coy about revealing just how or if Prometheus was related to the Alien universe. Before the first trailer hit, nobody knew for certain, and even after it aired the production team have refused to be drawn. They tended to talk about the new film having a similar 'DNA' and that was about it.

can't get links via I'm on my phone but from the top of my head.
The original script was a direct Alien prequel. The current script was a new story but a rewrite not a whole new script.

Scott spoke about the space jockeys a few times. Saying that the space jockey origin story was what he thought was most interesting. That would have to be the same universe.

I think Lindelof specifically said it was same universe as the alien films.

Bullseye1

Alittle disappointed in the PG-13 rating being mentioned. Hopefully the R rating gets released on BD.

OldeCinemaSoz

So much time...so much publicity...

Unlike ALIEN which came out at a time when audiences
least expected it.

And then ALIENS.

If it's a Summer Number then I'm on a downer as it ain't
gonna get into the big franchises for the number audiences...

Sadly.

seraphimvc

June seems so fcking far away love that TED talk trailer!!!!

pixelburp

Mellor wrote: »

can't get links via I'm on my phone but from the top of my head.
The original script was a direct Alien prequel. The current script was a new story but a rewrite not a whole new script.

Scott spoke about the space jockeys a few times. Saying that the space jockey origin story was what he thought was most interesting. That would have to be the same universe.

I think Lindelof specifically said it was same universe as the alien films.

I should point out that I'm not denying that the film's set in the Alien universe - it clearly is. I just find it weird - considering Hollywood's obsession with sequels - reboots etc, that it has never been the official line from all and sundry. Even the press releases have avoided any reference. Ultimately it doesn't matter because the evidence is there, it's just odd there's been quiet reluctance to go "yes, this is the same universe, it's all related".

Zubeneschamali

pixelburp wrote: »

it's just odd there's been quiet reluctance to go "yes, this is the same universe, it's all related".

The studio probably think more people will show up for "A New Ridley Scott SF Movie" than "Yet Another Alien Movie That Should Never Have Been Made."

Mellor

I'd say it more so Scott and all being clear that it's not about the xenomorphs.
Once they decided not to shoehorn the xenomorphs in. It was wise to establish that it's a new mythology, to avoid a backlash.

Sin City

As far as Im aware its going to focus on the space jockey and how they created the xenomorphs as a boilogical weapon either to kill off non intelligent life forms on a planet so intelligent life could evolve

The story goes that they were involved in the evolution of humans and we go in search of our creators and ...................**** happens

seraphimvc

PG13?!!! WTF?

Rabidlamb

seraphimvc wrote: »

PG13?!!! WTF?

Studio in bums on seats decision shocker, don't worry, Scott is known for his Directors Cuts.
It'll just mean you have to watch it twice.

Squelchy

seraphimvc wrote: »

PG13?!!! WTF?

You can get away with a lot more in PG13 movies these days though.
I'd obviously prefer it was 18's and all that that implies, but PG13 doesn't worry me the way it would a few years ago.

pixelburp

seraphimvc wrote: »

PG13?!!! WTF?

Source?

Sin City

I heard he made two versions

Pg13

And

R

Galvasean

Sin City wrote: »

I heard he made two versions

Pg13

And

R

Probably made an R version and hacked it down to PG13 in post. Happens a lot these days unfortunately.
I would not worry too much. You could probably get most of the original Alien into a PG13 film these days. Chest bursting aside of course, but that's not what this film is about anyway.

Mickeroo

The only way this could be 18's (NC-17 in the states) is if there's seriously hardcore drug use and graphic sex scenes. It's no big deal that its PG-13, there's no reason this can't be a proper sci-fi movie and PG-13 at the same time.

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is this is not an Alien movie i.e its not humans vs man-eating xenomorphs. We've no idea what kind of film this is going to be so there is no point getting hung up on the ratings imho.

Galvasean

Heck, Land of the Dead was 15PG here and that featured some serious disembowelment, not that I would expect nor particularly want such from Prometheus.
A lot of people seem to think that making something PG13 automatically makes it a kids movie, which is simply not the case.

Sin City

Still if its pg13 youll get a lot of kids in the cinema which I hate

Mickeroo

Sin City wrote: »

Still if its pg13 youll get a lot of kids in the cinema which I hate

Can't argue with you there

Squelchy

Sin City wrote: »

Still if its pg13 youll get a lot of kids in the cinema which I hate

That can be countered by the time of day you go to see a movie.

They mostly come during the day. Mostly.

pixelburp

If it's true, I wouldn't be too upset with the prospect of a PG13 movie; if anything I welcome it. I find in the horror genre the 'R' rating has become too much of a crutch for directors to cake their films with blood & gore, simply to mask a their lack of craft & creativity for proper scares & chills.

A competent director should be able to create scares without resorting to the use of fake blood; a perfect example being one of the better horror films of 2010, 'Insidious', yet it was PG-13.

uncleoswald

Squelchy wrote: »

That can be countered by the time of day you go to see a movie.

They mostly come during the day. Mostly.

I don't know, went to an evening show of Harry Potter awhile back and they were coming outta the walls, coming outta the goddamn walls!

Outkast_IRE

uncleoswald wrote: »

I don't know, went to an evening show of Harry Potter awhile back and they were coming outta the walls, coming outta the goddamn walls!

this is what the late show is for , the only time i go to the cinema is the 11.30pm showings:D usually only a dozen adults who really want to see it and wont go playing on phones and talking etc

Mickeroo

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

this is what the late show is for , the only time i go to the cinema is the 11.30pm showings:D usually only a dozen adults who really want to see it and wont go playing on phones and talking etc

They had to stop this around here because of all the feckin loud drunk teenagers it used to attract. Worse than the kids....

Spoonman75

uncleoswald wrote: »

I don't know, went to an evening show of Harry Potter awhile back and they were coming outta the walls, coming outta the goddamn walls!

Well if you find some kids in the cinema I say you take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

It's the only way to be sure.:cool:

Mickeroo

Have a gawk at this: https://www.weylandindustries.com/6EQUJ5/

Dublin_Gunner

Mickeroo wrote: »

Have a gawk at this: https://www.weylandindustries.com/6EQUJ5/

Thats a new desktop if ever I saw one!

merlinengine

I think the idea that it might not be about the xenomorphs may possibly be misinformation. If you look at the trailer and go to 0:26 you'll see someone with their helmet covered in acid and that acid didn't get there from eating pussy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H3XpWiMB_E&feature=fvst

On the other hand if there are no xenomorphs it could well be PG13 because the characters won't have anything to tear them to pieces in a really gorey way.

Mr. K

The build up to this film has been excellent. They've shown so much restraint in teasing us with a steady drip of information, but given so little away at the same time. The TED talk blew me away.

I have absolute faith in Ridley Scott on this...I just hope it's the blockbuster of the year (maybe alongside The Dark Knight Rises)!

krudler

Mr. K wrote: »

The build up to this film has been excellent. They've shown so much restraint in teasing us with a steady drip of information, but given so little away at the same time. The TED talk blew me away.

I have absolute faith in Ridley Scott on this...I just hope it's the blockbuster of the year (maybe alongside The Dark Knight Rises)!

I agree, with so many movies ruined before you've even stepped into the cinema these days from teasers, trailers, tv spots, superbowl ads, scenes being put on youtube, "first looks', video games, actions figure spoilers etc etc its nice to see a movie that people still dont know what its actually fully about, I've seen the trailer and thats enough, I want to be some bit suprised when I go to it

Galvasean

krudler wrote: »

I agree, with so many movies ruined before you've even stepped into the cinema these days from teasers, trailers, tv spots, superbowl ads, scenes being put on youtube, "first looks', video games, actions figure spoilers etc etc its nice to see a movie that people still dont know what its actually fully about, I've seen the trailer and thats enough, I want to be some bit suprised when I go to it

That's why I've been avoiding coverage of The Dark Knight. there is so much exposure on that film already I'd hazard a guess that one would be able to decipher the entire plot before the film gets released.
Prometheus on the other hand is how it should be done IMO. Drip feeding the fans little tiny bits of info, making us ravenous for more! We discuss and pick apart every tiny morsel of information and hearsay that comes our way while the filmmakers gleefully tow is along for the ride. It should ultimately lead to a more rewarding cinema experience for all.

pixelburp

The last movie I went in utterly blind as to its general twists & turns was Super 8: now a lot of the promotional material was equally vague as to what it was about & the nature of the science-fictional menace, but I avoided fora, spoiler posts, chit-chat etc, and subsequently enjoyed the film so much more because I had an intact sense of mystery and wonder. I learnt things as the characters in the film learnt things & made the experience all the more effective.

Between the internet & my general geekiness, it's rare I go into a movie these days without knowing something about the feature; be it general plot, characters, actors, cameos or whatnot. I want to know what I'm getting myself in for, and often that can spoil the freshness and surprise a feature-film may (or may not) have.

So Prometheus has me completely torn; on one hand I want to have another Super 8 experience & enjoy the movie as it happens, fresh & without prior knowledge; a pure cinematic experience that can't be beat. On the other hand, my movie / Alien geekiness demands I learn the truth of this film. I must know! And yet at the same time I don't want to

Galvasean

pixelburp wrote: »

The last movie I went in utterly blind as to its general twists & turns was Super 8: now a lot of the promotional material was equally vague as to what it was about & the nature of the science-fictional menace, but I avoided fora, spoiler posts, chit-chat etc, and subsequently enjoyed the film so much more because I had an intact sense of mystery and wonder. I learnt things as the characters in the film learnt things & made the experience all the more effective.

I feel the same about Super 8. While the film is certainly not without its flaws, it was very refreshing to walk into a movie not knowing exactly what to expect. Ditto for Inception. I avoided previews / reviews like the plague.
In hindsight there were some incredibly spoilery reviews out there for both movies which I was lucky to avoid. Many newspapers and magazines are particularly guilty of telling you the entire story of the movie in the first few paragraphs and then offering a bit of personal opinion in the end paragraph as a summary. This is not how a movie is supposed to be reviewed and it makes me sad that many professional film critics, people who make a living reviewing films, don't seem to know the very basics of writing a review.

Phew, went on a bit of a tangent there

merlinengine

Mr. K wrote: »

The build up to this film has been excellent. They've shown so much restraint in teasing us with a steady drip of information, but given so little away at the same time. The TED talk blew me away.

I have absolute faith in Ridley Scott on this...I just hope it's the blockbuster of the year (maybe alongside The Dark Knight Rises)!

Me too and I don't think Ridley Scott would have even entertained the idea unless everything was right.

Giruilla

This is pretty much the only film I'm looking forward to this year. Please don't be another let down..

stevenmu

The less I hear about this film, the more excited I am about it

red dave

Don't think I've seen this posted here yet. It's a "Star Map" or something.

Could contain hints that could be construed as spoilers.

Like

Is that an Alien egg at the front?

https://twitter.com/#!/Prometheus6812/status/177440145526632448/photo/1/large

Edit: Better link - https://www.weylandindustries.com/6EQUJ5/

Dublin_Gunner

red dave wrote: »

Don't think I've seen this posted here yet. It's a "Star Map" or something.

Post No. 529 above

red dave

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Post No. 529 above

DOH!

hahaha sorry

Galvasean

red dave wrote: »

Don't think I've seen this posted here yet. It's a "Star Map" or something.

Could contain hints that could be construed as spoilers.

Like

Is that an Alien egg at the front?

https://twitter.com/#!/Prometheus6812/status/177440145526632448/photo/1/large

Edit: Better link - https://www.weylandindustries.com/6EQUJ5/

Looks like a

chair

to me... Although the aesthetic is reminiscent of one I'll give you that.

Dublin_Gunner

Galvasean wrote: »

Looks like a

chair

to me... Although the aesthetic is reminiscent of one I'll give you that.

Thats what I first thought when I saw it. But now that he mentioned it, it does bare some resemblance.

red dave

Galvasean wrote: »

Looks like a

chair

to me... Although the aesthetic is reminiscent of one I'll give you that.

Yeah possibly

shaped similar to an egg

on purpose.

maybe its shaped just as a hint that the eggs make an appearance possibly at the end of the film

Spoonman75

red dave wrote: »

Don't think I've seen this posted here yet. It's a "Star Map" or something.

Could contain hints that could be construed as spoilers.

Like

Is that an Alien egg at the front?

https://twitter.com/#!/Prometheus6812/status/177440145526632448/photo/1/large

Edit: Better link - https://www.weylandindustries.com/6EQUJ5/[/QUOTE]

That's what I thought aswell, but it looks too big.

The back of a large chair? Big enough for a Space Jockey, perhaps?

Goldstein

stevenmu wrote: »

The less I hear about this film, the more excited I am about it

Me too - 84 days still to go...Hey man, I don't wanna rain on your parade but we're not gonna last 84 hours.

red dave

Ok so my other take on that picture is

that is the same style room or place on a spacejockey ship like where they first see the spacejockey in the original alien movie.

For example if that's a person standing in the centre then the chair at the side is the spacejockey chair.

Although other thought (along with thinking its an egg) was that it was a hologram with a spacejockey chair at the side

merlinengine

My take on the picture is that its Giger's version of superman's cave in the north pole!

FlashD

What I don't understand is why some of you are adding spoiler bars to opinions, can someone explain that or have you guys had a special screening of the film or something?

It dosen't take a flaming genius to know that the film is a prequel or at least an 'independent film' set before Alien

red dave

FlashD wrote: »

What I don't understand is why some of you are adding spoiler bars to opinions, can someone explain that or have you guys had a special screening of the film or something?

It dosen't take a flaming genius to know that the film is a prequel or at least an 'independent film' set before Alien

Some people may not want to look at the picture that was posted. Recent comments were about that picture. Rather than have to deal with spoiler police, i put spoilers on the comments just in case there would be complaints.