Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
It's all in the delivery. If this is, in fact, what the story is about, I'm going to wait to see how it's played out. It's also entirely possible that the whole thing is a marketing feint, to generate interest in the sequels he's producing, and give us something entirely different, like some ancient culture mysteriously disappearing 2000 years ago or something. The Incas and Anasazi are a little too recent for that, but there may be other, more innocuous, occurrences in history that he could use. Maybe the Mayans, or something out of India like the Mahabharata. The crucifixion seems almost too convenient, but who the hell knows?
Well, at least it's kind-of different than what we usually see in mindless popcorn action flicks. Gotta give him a little credit for at least trying a different slant to an old story.
Not if it's not in the movie. Do you get credit for things you don't put in a school paper? Just things you were thinking about?
I understand the desire to make this movie more than it was (a popcorn movie with equally pop science) but if it aint in the movie, it aint in the movie.
According to some scholars, he wasn't even that - he was just a fictional character created as an amalgam of various characteristics common to mythologized precursor messianic figures who appeared in the centuries preceding his era. We could call him a reboot.
Yeah, I got the 2000-years ago bit, but at what point are we supposed to infer that Jesus was a human-looking alien hybrid? I don't remember anything like that being mentioned, and frankly, it feels like a pretty big leap.
And on the third day, a xenomorph named Jesus burst forth from human Jesus's corpse. It descended into the rainforest and hid there for 2000 years until a Predator came to hunt it. The Predator succeeded. Unfortunately, Arnold Schwarzenegger came and blew him up.
What did we do to make God/our creators angry? Well, if you theorized that it was because we crucified Jesus, you win! Confirming that at one point the script explicitly spelled this out, Scott says that was the direction they were taking with the story -- at least at first. "We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose," he admits. "But if you look at it as an 'our children are misbehaving down there' scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, 'Let’s send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it.' Guess what? They crucified him."
The only on-screen allusion to this was the 2,000-year reference.
My own personal speculation on the connection between Jesus and the xenomorph: Since we pretty much know that the xenomorph comes from contact of the black goo with corrupted beings, perhaps the crucifixion of Jesus was the ultimate symbolic act of corruption for our race as a whole. Perhaps this was the "true" origin of the concept of original sin - a sin that we all must bear as a species, even though nobody who was there who either saw or perpetrated the act is still alive any more.
Well, at least it's kind-of different than what we usually see in mindless popcorn action flicks. Gotta give him a little credit for at least trying a different slant to an old story.
I also happen to be a fan of Ancient Alien Theory and I guess I give this film a little more latitude due to my admitted bias.
I'd rather he'd stick with either Greek Mythology or Christian Religion rather than having these engineers representing all Gods. I'm starting to get Stargate-SG1 vibes here.
Except that Prometheus IS a mindless popcorn action (horror) flick. It has no depth.
The whole idea that the Engineers decided to destroy humanity because we crucified space jesus doesn't make sense. They didn't like our violent nature so they plan genocide on a planetary scale?
The fact of the matter is that Ridley Scott and the writers were afraid of offending Christians with the whole "Space Jesus" thing. When the time came to do what needed to be done to make this movie profound, they pussied out. And now what we have is a bland, lackluster film, instead of the speculative masterpiece it should have been.
l don't even want any sequels. They had their chance to pick their balls up off the floor and they blew it.
The fact of the matter is that Ridley Scott and the writers were afraid of offending Christians with the whole "Space Jesus" thing. When the time came to do what needed to be done to make this movie profound, they pussied out. .
The fact of the matter is that Ridley Scott and the writers were afraid of offending Christians with the whole "Space Jesus" thing. When the time came to do what needed to be done to make this movie profound, they pussied out. .
l don't think any sort of extended cut can save it. No matter how much footage is put back in, the Engineers will still be humanoid instead of the biomechanical monstrosities that were insinuated in Alien. The characters will still be morons and the dialogue will still be lame.
l'm not saying l won't buy the extended blu-ray when it comes out, l' just saying that, when l do, l'll probably have this look on my face>>>
My take on it (having seen the movie a second time now), is that the movie being more on-the-nose about the cause of the Engineer's wrath was a consequence of earlier (and poorer) drafts but was deliberately moved away from for a bigger purpose than just feeling too on-the-nose or the rather silly claim that they were afraid of offending anyone. I think that watching the movie, it is clear that they "reason" for their wrath cannot be definitively assumed from anything, including Ridley's comments. I think it has to be considered still open ended; once they decided to set the movie up for a sequel, they explicitly have Shaw going off to get the answer. David even says that it is not important, but Shaw says it is to her because she is human and he is just a robot. So at this point it isn't Space Jesus (but it still could be in the future). So in summary, I don't think they intend for the audience to understand it yet, nor do they expect you to have to read outside material to understand this part. I think it is unanswered on purpose.
Apparently there is a whole conversation between David and the last Engineer that was cut from the film, maybe they discuss some of this there?
Also apparently there is a fight scene between the Engineer and Shaw (with the axe) on the life boat that they cut because they thought it was too unbelievable compared to him easily killing the other crew earlier, but I would like to see that fight in the deleted scenes.
Except that Prometheus IS a mindless popcorn action (horror) flick. It has no depth.
The whole idea that the Engineers decided to destroy humanity because we crucified space jesus doesn't make sense. They didn't like our violent nature so they plan genocide on a planetary scale?
They were also pissed off because humanity learned civilization from the violent Predators (whole stole and misused the xenomorphs) instead of following the Engineer's plan or developing it on our own.
It's amusingly easy to tie AvP into a movie that wanted to distance itself from that film. Peter learns of Charles Bishop Weyland's expedition knows there's intelligent alien life connected to humanity...after all, who'dfund a trillion dollar expedition based on just cave paintings/engravings?
Regarding Weyland. One thing I realized was Miss Vickers' line to David asking "Did anyone die?" She really was asking, "Did Peter Weyland die?"
Which really begs the question.... why was she THERE? If she wanted to control the company, you know, assume the throne, wouldn't him LEAVING be the perfect time to do that?
Instead she left on a 5 year (?) voyage to some remote planet, while OTHERS were running her Daddy's company... a perfect time for THEM to stage a coup.
Vickers.... as dumb as the rest of the characters.
Huh, it's funny. After 30 years we finally get a prequel to Alien directed by freakin Ridley Scott-- which I actually enjoyed-- and after 2 weeks I'm already over it and ready to focus on the next summer movie.
It was interesting seeing the guy from bad robot picking his teeth with Ridley Scott's bones of course. Reminds of how they treated GR and TNG. Did I mention I walked out on it and was the only one in the theater anyway?
It was interesting seeing the guy from bad robot picking his teeth with Ridley Scott's bones of course. Reminds of how they treated GR and TNG. Did I mention I walked out on it and was the only one in the theater anyway?
I think I've been the only person in a showing before. I remember seeing Sicko near the end of its run, it was around 6pm. I thought there was a guy sat behind a few rows behind me but at the end of the film I think it was just someone who worked there catching it too
Gotta give him a little credit for at least trying a different slant to an old story.
Peter learns of Charles Bishop Weyland's expedition knows there's intelligent alien life connected to humanity...after all, who'dfund a trillion dollar expedition based on just cave paintings/engravings?
