Prometheus

Alien was a film based on one simple premise (horror from the unknown), and the way Scott managed to play on a single emotion in a masterful form - paradoxically, the simplicity of the film ensured that the experience from it does not age for even a second - the horror and panic are captured in clear and virtuoso form. Prometheus is based on roughly three premises (the relationship of the creator - creation / faith / fear of the unknown), but none of them can even make it to the embryonic state. To put it bluntly: the script is awful. Half of the characters act as if they have just undergone a lobotomy, the metaphysical overlaps are resolved by repeating the word "faith", and the most human and best-written character is an android. The jump scares are cheap, as well as genre props (olms and a crab man, WTF?), there is a complete lack of the finesse with which the terror in Alien was composed from the a dense soundtrack and a masterfully composed image (some of the action scenes are pure routine)... On the other hand, I appreciate that even though Ridley is already noticeably running out of breath and ideas, Prometheus still has a magnificent artistic solution and your head spins from the giant scenes. In the end, I wondered if this film was needed in terms of the "aliens" of the series - the answer "about as much as everything after Aliens". So the answer is very little, or not at all. He answers the few questions with the help of cliché, and he doesn't open any new ones (even if he really wants to). The deep disappointment can be explained by the fact that the expectations were set elsewhere by the fault of the creators, i.e., something other than an "action horror B-movie with an A-movie design and a philosopher from McDonald’s". I will be mourning until July... [50%] (06/01/2012)

Ridley Scott no longer knows how to come up with something new. He intensively copies from Alien and subtly quotes other masters of the big screen (Kubrick, Lean), but he doesn’t manage to put together a sophisticated mythology from a lot of enigmatic allusions. The more consistently straightforward, less ostentatious final third of Prometheus, when broken bones, flamethrowers and heroic gestures take the place of tautologies that go nowhere and the attempt at philosophical sci-fi rapidly morphs into an intergalactic variation on rape-revenge movies (by which Scott again shows himself to be a filmmaker capable of unusual feminine empathy and very clever use of gender stereotypes). The change of approach to the material is so sudden and unexpected that it gives rise to the hypothesis that perhaps the director was playing a cruel joke at the expense of the excited viewers. It’s as if he thought, “fine, they wanted something spectacular, so I’ll really prepare them for it at the beginning, but then I can more brutally bring them back to reality with a guilty-pleasure genre movie.” However, I rather see the reason for that in the necessity of cutting the film short than in the director’s sense of irony, which means that we will have to wait for the full-fledged Prometheus to arrive in the autumn, when the director’s cut will be released (after Kingdom of Heaven and Robin Hood, I’m starting to wonder if this isn’t actually a clever marketing move – to give viewers the feeling that a distinctive creative work was butchered by evil studio bosses and if they want to see the film as it was originally intended, they will have to spend more money on the DVD). Prometheus is a breathtakingly unstylish product with an unclear purpose. Because it doesn’t offer a satisfactory answer, both its suspense and its stumbling block consist in the prolonged uncertainty triggered by the advertising campaign. I’m afraid that the film’s “point”, which is very funny in its own way, will neither make anyone angry nor elicit a sly smile on the second attempt. If the aim of the film was to cause embarrassment, it accomplished its mission, but it doesn’t offer satisfying summer entertainment. By that, I’m not saying that I didn’t enjoy it. I did, but similarly as I did with Pitch Black, in whose case the price-performance ratio was significantly different. 75% (06/02/2012)

I think that there’s about an hour of film missing. An hour to work on the relationships, to say where they found out certain things or else somehow to show that these are just assumptions, to take their time a bit and not to hurry on ahead at breakneck speed. In some places I prayed to be have the time to rummage about in the environments presented. I have no gripes about the story, looking for an answer to the question that has no answer (that guy died immediately in the first scene) is just a catalyst for investigating possibilities and space. An attempt to go further. Visually, it’s top-notch, Ridley made sure of that. Similarly, he took great pains over the casting, each actor fits their role perfectly. Noomi is really fine, but Michael Fassbender easily dominates the picture. It’s a shame too that Guy Pearce made such a brief appearance. The ending was rather surprising the way it broke down into a regular massacre. I have the feeling that Alien DNA harms this movie, the same as the hype and trailers revealing too much. I look forward to the director’s cut. (06/12/2012)

Spoiler impressionology! It's been exactly ten years, give or take a few days, since I saw the first Alien, the film that piqued my interest in cinema as a whole, and the question of what came before has actually been gnawing at me for a decade. So from a purely subjective point of view, I have no reservations about it because the film answered my questions. First of all, it confirmed that the aliens are a biological weapon that probably cannot be controlled by anyone. So far, so good. But when I look at it with hindsight, aided by a brief post-film debate, I don't quite understand why the writers had to break the film into survival horror in the second half, endowing the characters with the logic of incompetent teenagers. Visually, including Streitenfeld's excellent audio, there's nothing to fault it for (well, except for Weyland's mask, that's horrible) but there's not a single climactic scene, something that would draw me to the movie theater for a second screening. This is actually a huge shame because, for the first hour, Scott was creating a more interesting world than James Cameron has recently. After leaving the theatre I was ready to give it four stars, given that the marketing campaign had gone beyond me, but I thought about the film a bit too much during the twenty-minute journey home. (06/07/2012)