This was the case with Kingdom Of Heaven, the director's cut of which was a pretty decent film. However, I don't think any amount of cut footage can improve the script of Prometheus, unless every instance of someone doing dumb things for no reason will be removed. It will make a director's cut of about 20 minutes of truly breathtaking special effects shots.
Highlighted the important part. Nevertheless, even if it was true, all it's saying was Lindelof's script was CHEAPER. Which means big CGI set pieces or whatever were cut. Characters not acting stupid... doesn't cost much. Ridley shouldn't be taken off the hook, mate.
There is also one other element invovled in the process of making a film. The Studio itself. Studios could set a release date for film, before even principal photography begins. The studio might not approve any additional funds for reshooting scenes with new dialouge. Some actors might have had experiance with directors who disapproved of ad-libbing as such refrain from it. A studio can force a particular cut on the director. What are the exact terms of the contracts etc.. It doesn't look as if Prometheus is a massive hit at the box-office but it looks like it's done enough to turn a small profit.
The part that amazes me...what in blazes was an extra 100 million dollars going to do for this movie?
It looks like Prometheus might squeak past $300 million worldwide. It's currently sitting at $299,679,925. Probably enough to be profitable, especially with DVD sales.
It'll definitely make it past $300 million. I suspect it will finish its run in theatres at $303-310 million, depending on how it does overseas (in the UK, not surprisingly, Scott's film has been doing quite well). Is it enough to warrant a sequel? I'm not sure -- but I hope so. Unlike Alien, Prometheus isn't really a complete narrative. Hopefully they won't try to stretch it to a trilogy, though.
While it's still got areas to explore I think overall the film works, it's main flaw imo are the poor secondary characters. Scott has said he has this structured as a trilogy though. I'm too rushed right now to track down a link at the moment though.
Ridley Scott wil turn only 75 this fall, so he still has plenty time to shoot another couple of those, since in the next few years he's only producing TV shows and another Blade Runner - if you go by what has been announced. Eastwood is like - a hundred years old now, and he's till going strong, even does appear on Reality TV now. Scott can be productive easily for another 25 years.-
Terrible movie script and terrible sales? Your career in Hollywood is history, unless you're really well connected and can attribute it to things beyond your control. Or, let enough time go by for people to forget... sometimes you can remake yourself, like what happened with Mickey Rourke. Terrible movie script, mixed movie reception, and reasonably profitable sales? You're still good and shouldn't have trouble getting more work. Good script, well liked movie, and nicely profitable sales? You're sought out and can almost write your own ticket. Great script, Oscar awards, and blockbuster sales? You're not only writing your own ticket, you're telling the movie houses what movies you're making and they just nod "yes" as they fork over the funds.
The glorification of this movie being a semi-prequel to "Alien" seems to have been over leveraged for this film. Ridley Scott, the celebrated master director. While he is certainly one of the better directors around, you'd think with the positioning of this movie it would be at least as good as Alien, if not falling a little behind it. But the TBBS opinions on this movie are all over the place. There's no clear concensus on this being a terrific or really good movie. When you employ people on a very expensive mission, you make sure they're top notch and highly qualified. They won't be idiots at the sign of the first crisis because failure is an expensive consequence. Immensely expensive in this case. So, it's very disheartening to hear that they behave like this. Was part of the problem due to the editing? Was enough captured on film whereas a better editing job could have resulted in a finer film? If 30 minutes were cut, I really wonder how much of that would have contributed to a welcomed improvement. So... it's another sci-fi movie with a lot of eye candy to make up for the deficiencies? That's a huge disappointment. I've been holding off on seeing it but if the eye candy is as good as reported, then I'll have to catch it before it leaves the theaters. I just hope I'm not as sorely disappointed as so many people have been. Wow--very interesting treatise on the movie. Anyway... I'm really baffled how productions with such deep pockets can invest so much then screw it up with trivial mistakes that could have been avoided. Can't they see it coming as editing results unfold? I wonder how much Lindelof co-wrote the screen play. I have to say, this guy puts on a bit more show than I feel telegraphs real talent. While some characters on LOST made stupid mistakes, they were mostly believable people. But in this movie? You'd think with all of his experience he'd have more sensibility on making characters more intelligent and thoughtful. But no, it sounds like he throws that out the window. Another seductive beginning and unfinished ending kind of deal.
Even if the script sucks, I still recommend seeing the flick because it has an epic grandeur to it that is undeniable. And it's probably best seen in the theatre.
Thanks for your sweeping generalization. Sure there were some characters that were difficult to believe, but I found a number of them quite believable in an admittedly unbelievable situation.
I've just seen it, and holy shit! It truly is that bad. The characters, every single one of them, are full blown idiots. The only guy who is not an irrational stupid, is the Captain. Until he pointlessly kills himself and the two others. Autopilot anyone? Even the Engineers were stupid. I guess they found the black goo and those vagina cobras just as cute and played around with them. Speaking of Engineers... it would have been something had the Engineer they've woken up in the end actually recognized friend from foe. He wakes up after 2000 years of sleep. Shaw talks to him, gets beaten up by the other guys. I would have expected that he would have at least TRIED to understand what the hell was going on all of a sudden.
Biggest disappointment for the year so far. Maybe Scott shouldn't bother with that Blade Runner sequel.
Well, chaos diverted me from seeing it this weekend. I think I may just skip it after all and save my money...
Heck, they could've turned it into a different movie with a 15-second subtitle. When the revived Ancient grabs the android, just add some text so he says "This planet is level 14 quarantined! None of you may leave or you'll spread the infection to other worlds!" Then the android says, "But we must return." and the alien says "So be it. I must kill you to save your species." Boom. Whole new movie.
What really got me was the stupid grin on their faces as they needlessly agreed to sacrifice themselves with him, just... because.
The Proto-Indo-European that was intended to be spoken by David: "This man is here because he does not want to die. He believes you can give him more life." However, some of the David's exchange with the Engineer was cut so I'm not sure what actually made it into the film. As it is, unless you happen to understand the lingo, David might as well have said "See your bike, it's a girl's bike."