In the year 2089, archaeologists Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) uncover a star map amongst a series of ancient cave paintings connecting cultures around the world. The pair interpret this as a message left by an alien race they dub the Engineers, who may be responsible for creating human life, inviting mankind to make contact. Some years later, the spaceship Prometheus reaches a distant moon known as LV-223 with Shaw and Holloway aboard as part of a science team. As funded by ailing industrialist Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce - in old geezer makeup), commanded by glam but no-nonsense mission leader Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) and including inquisitive but morally ambiguous android David (Michael Fassbinder), their mission is to unlock the secrets of creation itself. What they uncover exceeds their darkest nightmares and could spell the end for life on Earth.
To say this semi-prequel to the seminal Alien (1979) was eagerly anticipated would be a gross understatement. First off, Ridley Scott deserves some credit for attempting to expand the Alien mythos beyond the realms of simple shock-horror or worse, self-referential fanboy-pandering, towards tackling bigger themes. The origins of life, the nature of the universe and what it means to be human are some of the meaty morsels Scott serves up as part of an ambitious stew, at long last tapping the portentous Lovecraftian-by-way-of-Erich von Daeniken undertones hinted at in the first film. Ambiguous is the byword for the approach adopted by Scott and his screenwriters, Jon Spaihts (who penned Russian-produced alien invasion pic The Darkest Hour (2011)) and Damon Lindelhof, as underlined by the slightly unsettling ideological shift away from the series’ traditional spirited, emotionally-driven female lead onto the cerebral, morally ambivalent android character.
Despite the presence of strong actresses Rapace and Theron, it is Fassbinder who essays the key character and delivers the most notable performance. Herein lies part of the problem. Whereas before the franchise concerned itself with Ellen Ripley, a gutsy, certainly smart but identifiably ordinary woman caught in the midst of unfathomable alien terror, here the plot revolves around someone whose intellectual curiosity compels them to tamper with the unknowable then cock a quizzical eyebrow at the ensuing chaos. Simply put, Prometheus is all ideas with no follow-through and sorely lacking in heart. Ridley Scott invests so much time posing the big questions (and make no mistake, the film is all questions with zero answers) he fails to notice the myriad of niggling, little questions that wriggle out and, like an infestation of alien parasites, collectively burrow inside this unwieldy leviathan until it sinks in its own primordial swamp.
Why does Charlie behave like such an antagonistic jerk? For what reason does one character infect someone with an alien parasite? Why does the surly punk rock geologist (Sean Harris) sensibly refuse to risk his life delving into a danger spot only to linger around its corridors like a suicidal idiot? What is an accomplished actress like Charlize Theron doing here when her character contributes next to nothing to the plot, besides looking fantastic in a skin-tight space suit? These are only a few among the many earthly inconsistencies that bubble annoyingly away in the back of one’s brain when we are meant to be pondering the film’s weightier, metaphysical themes. Scott, Spaihts and Lindlehof try to things both ways by positing the existence of man is a cosmic mistake yet seeking solace in Shaw’s unswavering belief in a higher power. It is less than convincing, further undone by Rapace’s disappointingly tepid turn.
On a visual level, naturally, the film does not disappoint. Scott’s reputation as a creator of vivid, exquisitely realised worlds remains indisputible while he also pulls off a nightmarish caesarean sequence that proves a visceral, suspenseful, grippingly gross highpoint. Amidst an array of slithery, slimy, Lovecraftian terrors, the Engineers rather undermine the impact of Alien’s legendary “Space Jockey”, reducing something that was once an awe-inspiring harbringer of cosmic menace to a Star Trek level purple meanie of the week. Despite some individually compelling and intellectually stimulating sequences, Prometheus fails to weave any of its tantalising threads into anything remotely resembling a coherent narrative.
Talented, prolific British director whose background in set design and advertising always brings a stylised, visually stunning sheen to often mainstream projects. Scott made his debut in 1977 with the unusual The Duellists, but it was with his next two films - now-classic sci-fi thrillers Alien and Blade Runner - that he really made his mark. Slick fantasy Legend and excellent thriller Someone to Watch Over Me followed, while Thelma and Louise proved one of the most talked-about films of 1991. However, his subsequent movies - the mega-budget flop 1492, GI Jane and the hopeless White Squall failed to satisfy critics or find audiences.
Scott bounced back to the A-list in 2000 with the Oscar-winning epic Gladiator, and since then has had big hits with uneven Hannibal, savage war drama Black Hawk Down and his Robin Hood update. Prometheus, tentatively sold as a spin-off from Alien, created a huge buzz in 2012, then a lot of indignation. His Cormac McCarthy-penned thriller The Counselor didn't even get the buzz, flopping badly then turning cult movie. Exodus: Gods and Kings was a controversial Biblical epic, but a success at the box office, as was sci-fi survival tale The Martian.
Alien Covenant was the second in his sci-fi prequel trilogy, but did not go down well with fans, while All the Money in the World was best known for the behind the scenes troubles it overcame. Incredibly, in his eighty-fourth year he was as busy as he always was, with one flop in The Last Duel and one hit in House of Gucci keeping him in the public eye, not to mention a Blade Runner television series in the offing. Brother to the more commercial, less cerebral Tony Scott.
One thing bothers more than this epic disappointments woeful script, dearth of characterisation, horribly unconvincing scientists, tat performances (save Fassbendertron), anaemic vangelis-minus-the magic score and inablity of certain players to run/jump sideways and that is...the prologue.
Seriously someone give seriously give me a valid interpretation of that cynically ambiguous vignette? What a lame attempt to generate mystique. Perhaps the inevitable directors cut will shed some much need light on this mess, or it could perhaps make a sucky movie more painful by the addition of an extra 45 minutes. If anyone but Scott had directed this would it have been so respectfully received? If Len Wisemans name was emblazoned on the poster? God, give me some back to basics visceral body horror over the fatuity of Von Daniken inspired faux-philosophy.
In a way I love this flick almost as much as I loathe it as it will no doubt provide plenty of sloppy post-pub debate for years to come - just like Blade Runner, but wait, didn't Ridley say Deckard was really a....
Posted by:
Jason Cook
Date:
21 Jun 2012
Cannot even begin to describe how awful this movie is.
Posted by:
Rónán Doyle
Date:
22 Jun 2012
Its Z-grade hokum tarted up with multi-million dollar CGI, its a project whose existence from the very beginning was about exploiting the positive culture of feeling and goodwill of cinephiles towards a classic franchise "If anyone can steer the Alien universer back on the right track again, surely its Scott" was the cry I often heard to silence naysayers such as myself prior to the flick's release. I'll be honest, next to Crystal Skull this was possibly the greatest cinematic dissapointment of my life. Lets milk the fans for a few greasy dimes more. Its got grade A talent attached. Its too big to fail....yeah...right. Can't wait for the Blade Runner sequel boys, I'm having kittens here :P
Posted by:
Andrew Pragasam
Date:
22 Jun 2012
Is Prometheus a disappointment. Yes. Is Prometheus a cynical cash-in on fans' goodwill towards the seminal original? With all due respect: no. It is a sincere attempt to steer the franchise into more cerebral territory, let down by a half-baked script whose attempts at ambiguity leave more loose ends than a bucket of spaghetti. You want to talk exploitative try those lousy Aliens vs. Predator films.
Prometheus bears all the hallmarks of money being thrown at a script that really needed a few more drafts to iron out its ideas. There are solid concepts here but the writing is sloppy. To Scott's credit the caesarean sequence is a top-notch visceral set-piece. While I would agree Fassbender is great, the centring of the film's idealogical debate around his character was ill-conceived.
Posted by:
Rónán Doyle
Date:
22 Jun 2012
Heartily agree Andrew as regards the caesarean section, tasty body horror! Shame there wasn’t more squirm inducing stuff of that calibre. Personally I just can’t fathom for the life of me how the hell it was greenlit with that travesty of script. I mean there’s bad and then there’s what was delivered here. Ridley’s a legend and deserving of immense respect, a truly seminal director and visual stylist but for me the end result smacked of resting on reputational laurels to the nth degree. A belief that Scott’s aesthetic alchemy would somehow transmute the trash on the page into something profound and golden, he’s no neophyte, to launch ahead with that script...well...I just don’t get it. If the effects had been lacking and yet the heart of the film, the fundaments, it’s story and themes had been something special as opposed to an ill conceived amalgam of 2001-style existentialist star gazing and Blade Runners preoccupations with the nature of humanity then that would have been more than forgivable. People seem to be fetishising over the visuals to a large degree as though they alone compensate for so ponderous and drear a narrative.
To me Prometheus is like an attractive hipster chick that has conspicuously placed a Jean-Paul Sartre in her back pocket so as create an aura of mystique and intelligence. She’s nice to look at but you ask a few questions of her and swiftly discern a poseur. What was the opening vignette about? There’s so many holes in this flick you’d swear it was bloody target range dummy.
What was delivered was tantamount to an attractive veneer concealing a rotten core structure which no amount of half-baked philosophical prattling could shore up. If Scott had managed to suffuse the proceedings with the same degree of subtext and metaphor as Blade Runner this would have been magnificent, a Lazarus like resurrection for the franchise. I genuinely believe it’s a cynical cash-in, part of the fun of the Alien mythos was the element of not knowing, the mystery and debate as to the engineers/xenomorphs origins. The project seemed to stem from a desperate desire to anchor something in the Alien universe no matter how wafer-thin or insipid its plot, all concerned knowing Scott’s name attached would generate the green. It all comes back to that script, that creative clutching at straws. In my humble opinion the fans deserved more.
Posted by:
Graeme Clark
Date:
26 Apr 2013
After hearing how terrible this was, finally catching up with it was a pleasant surprise. Yes, it's caught between beyond our ken mysticism and down and dirty (or squelchy) horror, but maybe I've seen too many of the Alien rip-offs and am used to that sort of pulling in two directions so that I saw it as an improvement on Galaxy of Terror and its ilk.
I liked the way it reminisced about the way post-Kubrick's 2001 seventies big idea sci-fi gave way to the thrills and spills of the eighties, and also the theme about life finding a way to survive being all very well until a different form of life comes along that's more successful. It was very Darwinistic for all its ponderings on the religious side, not quite atheistic but none too keen on all powerful deities either. The concept that we should seek out our creators was a potent one, especially when it means we get a new perspective on them, in this case one of fear and loathing! It wasn't as intellectual as it was aiming for, but I thought it was Scott's best movie in years.
Display comments