- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Prometheus (Major Spoiler) Discussion Thread
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:09 pm to Lacour
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:09 pm to Lacour
quote:
The damn thing hisses at them. Twice. And bristles, TELLING them, "hey, I'm about to frick you up." So what do they do? They are all happy and joking and giddy, even though a moment ago they were freaking out about encountering lifeforms and went in the opposite direction when the captain told them about it. So we try to pet the pissed off alien. Brilliant
You make too much sense. Off with you!
1
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:10 pm to molsusports
quote:
no, never have
why?
There's a FAQ for Prometheus section on there, it seems to be a multiple-poster compendium, and there's a section very much like what you listed in regards to Vickers robot v. not robot.
LINK
I didn't know if you had something to do with that or if it was just a co-winky-dink. Either way, good stuff. I wanna grab a beer with you and talk about this shite all day.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:21 pm to ToesOnTheNose213
interesting, they had some items I didn't mention.
I'm wondering if they worked in a mention to Epimetheus in there somewhere?
I'm wondering if they worked in a mention to Epimetheus in there somewhere?
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:43 pm to molsusports
A question for those thinking this was a good movie...
Given that our present DNA is an exact match of a deliberately planted supply, how do we explain the human fossil record that contains australopithecus and homo habilis and such? Did the DNA devolve into something lesser first only to reassemble in the exact same arrangement? Or were there homo sapiens all along, and some mutants happen to come and go? And if the latter is the case, why is there no equally old fossil of homo sapiens?
Just wondering.
eta: hmmm... On second thought, maybe the DNA was only planted 35000 years ago, and just coincidentally was very similar to beings that were already on earth.
Given that our present DNA is an exact match of a deliberately planted supply, how do we explain the human fossil record that contains australopithecus and homo habilis and such? Did the DNA devolve into something lesser first only to reassemble in the exact same arrangement? Or were there homo sapiens all along, and some mutants happen to come and go? And if the latter is the case, why is there no equally old fossil of homo sapiens?
Just wondering.
eta: hmmm... On second thought, maybe the DNA was only planted 35000 years ago, and just coincidentally was very similar to beings that were already on earth.
This post was edited on 6/11/12 at 7:59 pm
Posted on 6/11/12 at 7:55 pm to Rex
Well that settles it. You're smarter and better than Ridley Scott.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:00 pm to Rex
Even if seeded with the DNA, I would think there would still be an evolutionary chain of events that would eventually end up with us reaching our current form. Are you suggesting that homo sapiens just started washing out of the river?
Regardless, as with any science-fiction movie, I am willing to take some blind leaps and accept a plot device, even if it isn't grounded in science. It is after all a movie, and not a documentary on NatGeo.
Regardless, as with any science-fiction movie, I am willing to take some blind leaps and accept a plot device, even if it isn't grounded in science. It is after all a movie, and not a documentary on NatGeo.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:04 pm to Rex
I view the whole Prometheus concept as a Ridley Scott vehicle for man to seek out his creator and ask the fundamental questions regarding the purpose of his existence. If you choose to think of the "science" in this movie as remotely plausible then I think you missed the boat - that's just not what they chose to do in this movie.
Pretty much none of it makes any sense. The founder event is ridiculous (esp on a planet already inhabited by highly evolved plant life sharing the same genetic code). Their concepts of space travel are annoying (in 70-80 years we're exceeding light speed or travel thru worm holes?)... and they talk about radioisotope dating in a ridiculous way on more than one occasion.
Pretty much none of it makes any sense. The founder event is ridiculous (esp on a planet already inhabited by highly evolved plant life sharing the same genetic code). Their concepts of space travel are annoying (in 70-80 years we're exceeding light speed or travel thru worm holes?)... and they talk about radioisotope dating in a ridiculous way on more than one occasion.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:06 pm to NOSTRODAMUS
quote:
Well that settles it. You're smarter and better than Ridley Scott.
I think it's hilarious how you people are so focused on all these deep, in depth, profound meanings.
It's not profound. It's poor writing.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:08 pm to molsusports
quote:
Pretty much none of it makes any sense. The founder event is ridiculous (esp on a planet already inhabited by highly evolved plant life sharing the same genetic code). Their concepts of space travel are annoying (in 70-80 years we're exceeding light speed or travel thru worm holes?)... and they talk about radioisotope dating in a ridiculous way on more than one occasion.
None of it makes sense?
Then how the hell can you people rave about it?
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:11 pm to Lacour
quote:
It's not profound. It's poor writing.
I don't think anyone is arguing that it is profound. People are trying to understand what Ridley was getting at and fill in unanswered questions from the movie. I don't think anyone is have theological debates or using the movie as to understand who created us, why we are here, etc.
It is fine if you didn't enjoy the movie and I will be the first to agree that it wasn't great. What I don't understand is why you care if we theorize about plot points in the movie? Does it really bother you if we want to debate what David said to the Engineer, or what the black goo is?
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:14 pm to Waffle House
Yeah
I want everyone to march on Scott's house because of Thelma and Louise
And stick a fire ant Popsicle up Lindeloffs as payback for lost.
I want everyone to march on Scott's house because of Thelma and Louise
And stick a fire ant Popsicle up Lindeloffs as payback for lost.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:15 pm to molsusports
quote:
I view the whole Prometheus concept as a Ridley Scott vehicle for man to seek out his creator and ask the fundamental questions regarding the purpose of his existence. If you choose to think of the "science" in this movie as remotely plausible then I think you missed the boat - that's just not what they chose to do in this movie.
So now we're supposed to guess which parts were intended as allegory? Isn't that just a cop out... if it didn't make particular sense it's because we weren't supposed to take it literally?
I didn't find it poetic enough to be allegorical. I think it failed any which way you look at it.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:17 pm to Lacour
quote:
None of it makes sense?
I was referring to all of their "science" in the film
quote:
Then how the hell can you people rave about it?
I'm not raving, I think it is a flawed movie that is interesting enough to talk about because it set higher goals than it was able to reach
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:21 pm to Rex
I must say, the more I think about this movie, the more I realize how poorly written it was. Great concept, ideas, acting, but terribly written
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:24 pm to molsusports
quote:
a flawed movie that is interesting enough to talk about
This.
If we can have 50+ page threads debating whether a softball player dropped a ball on purpose, I don't see why we can't spend another 50 debating theories on this movie.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:26 pm to molsusports
quote:
I think it is a flawed movie that is interesting enough to talk about
Fair enough.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:30 pm to Waffle House
quote:
I don't see why we can't spend another 50 debating theories on this movie.
You're entitled.
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:33 pm to Waffle House
quote:
If we can have 50+ page threads debating whether a softball player dropped a ball on purpose
They played baseball not sotftball. Get your shite together
Posted on 6/11/12 at 8:39 pm to jacks40
quote:
They played baseball not sotftball. Get your shite together
Lulz
Posted on 6/11/12 at 9:12 pm to jacks40
quote:
They played baseball not sotftball.
Haha yeah, not paying attention on that. But either way, the point stands that this forum is full of pointless debate and theories.
Page 20 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News