‘Prometheus’ Spoilers Discussion

Published 3 years ago by , Updated September 18th, 2012 at 8:09 am,

Prometheus Movie Spoilers Prometheus Spoilers Discussion

While our readers are already talking about this movie in the comments section of our Prometheus review, this is the place where you can discuss Prometheus spoilers without concerns about ruining the movie for folks who haven’t seen it yet.

If you’re posting comments here, assume that anyone in the conversation has seen the movie – if you haven’t seen the movie, we would recommend you don’t read the comments here until you have. 

We’ve set up a poll below where you can rate Prometheus for yourself. Other than that, feel free to discuss the film and all its surprises! Still wondering about how – exactly - Prometheus connects to Alien? Read our Prometheus – Alien Connection Explained’ Article!

For further discussion of the film’s connections from the Screen Rant team check out our Prometheus episode of the SR Underground podcast.


[poll id="327"]


Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.

Prometheus is Rated R for sci-fi violence including some intense images, and brief language. Now playing in theaters.

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. First off – I loved the movie! Its not perfect but I really enjoyed it…

    One question though: how did David know there was more than one ship at the end of the film?

    • When they first fly over LV-223 and are looking for a site to land and star exploring they see several structures that appear to be in a linear formation going down a valley. Each is identical and that is why Shaw’s boyfriend tells them to land in front of them, because they are man made. Each one probably has a ship.

      • Had quite a laugh reading through some of the comments since i posted a few days ago. Matt (the one who didn’t like the movie) has raised some good points on films being consistent within the world in witch they are set – this is a biggie for me too. However i did think the black goo that ended up changing Holloway into some random creature has different affects depending on what it comes into contact with (hence its a bio weapon) and is designed for a purpose.

        That being said I didn’t fully understand the opening sequence either. I believed at first that this scene was to represent the earth and the beginning of life on it, but this would have meant after further thought that this was some 4 billion years ago so i discounted that for a far more likely this scenario that this is a scene where the engineers create life on another world. Ok, so if they create life – why did they fly to earth 1000s of years before humans had technology (35k years if i remember correctly) and tell us to visit them on this moon outpost if all they do there is create things to kill us or creations they have made that have possibly gone wrong in there eyes… didn’t really make any scene to me that – but im looking for a good theory on it…

        Anyway back to my original question “how did David know there was more than one ship at the end of the film?”

        Dave Mowers – i appreciated the answer but if this was the case why was David the only one to realise this? Shaw must have known as well as most of the others that this wasn’t the only ship? The angle i was going with my line of question was i believed David to be a double agent of some sort with a hidden agenda (not the one for the old man) and we as humans knew a lot more than we were first lead to believe in the movie. Again some evidence for this would be David trying to drug the heavily pregnant Shaw and put her in stasis – while telling no one else she was up the duff with an exo-morph. thoughts?

        • I just saw the movie about an hour ago (and enjoyed it a lot!). From what I remember, by the time the crew heard that the structure contained a spaceship, everything was starting to go to crap and they probably just didn’t think through the possibility of more ships. Plus, David knew a lot of things before the humans and certainly didn’t tell give them any extra info unless it helped him.

        • No… no.. no.. no…

          People seem fixated that the opening scene is how life was created on Earth. Where do they get that from?

          It seems pretty obvious to me that the opening scene is how the Titans homeworld died to explain why they haven’t been back in 4,000 years.

          If you want to point-out a flaw in the film, explain this… Why do thousands of years of cave drawings point to this planet? If it’s a top secret weapons dump and NOT their homeworld, then why would they imprint this idea onto us as a place to visit? They spent 10,000 years telling us how to get to their weapons dump?

          I think it WAS their homeworld all along. I think the opening sequence shows how their homeworld was once lush and vibrant, and then died. The ship in the opening sequence was neither Human nor Titan, but it planted the rotten DNA upon the Titans and humans, both!

          This movie was rich and deep, and reeks of a sequel!

  2. I enjoyed the movie very much, but it did make me think back to when Alien first came out and I was disappointed in it. I had just read the book and was fascinated with the ideas, but being a commercial filmmaker Scott ended up creating a boogie-monster chase. I love concept movies. I hate action sequences, and especially car chases. I also hate manufactured cinematic tension and especially gotcha stuff.

    I found the revelation of the engineers and the scenes inside their ships, taking us inside the mystery showcased in ’79 (the ships pilot, who one assumed to be fossilized, but with the new movies’ timeline was perhaps not.

    What I did NOT like about this movie is the way it seemed to skirt the very direct associations. The creature at the end looked somewhat different than the original alien and I suspect it has something to do with licensing issues. Ridley probably didn’t want to pay for the original alien design use. But that was a moment that interrupted the suspension of disbelief for me.

    It also seems that to some degree Ridley and the writers concocted this story after the fact.

    Funny that this story occurs BEFORE the original Alien story, because the technology appears much more advanced, but I suppose that’s to be expected and is not a big deal.

    My biggest problem with the movie is the complete lack of connection to the opening sequence. What does that engineer killing himself and morphing into something else have to do with anything?

    • “My biggest problem with the movie is the complete lack of connection to the opening sequence. What does that engineer killing himself and morphing into something else have to do with anything?”

      It’s not that there’s no connection, it’s just that that connection is completely open ended and could be interrupted, whichever way you want.

      For me, his genomic material, acerbated by the gene therapy goo, was melded into the prehistoric primordial soup, which then gave rise to the primates. Well … that’s fine for me, I have a healthy imagination and can make connections like that in an instant. On the other hand, this isn’t really my movie so in that manner, it would be good to know if it were an accident of sorts or a part of a preordained plan via the engineers, or even a faction of them. These questions are completely unaddressed and thus, the average viewer will have no idea as to the significance of that opening sequence.

    • Yes, I was wondering what was going on with that guy at the beginning. The only thing that came to mind for me was that he sort of “self destructed” and put his DNA in the water. Presumably some cave men or apes drank the water and that’s how our human race started. Keep in mind the way David put the drop of stuff in that scientist’s drink and was able to “infect” him.

      Perhaps the alien at the beginning was doing this as an act of rebellion, and wasn’t supposed to start a new race of humans on this planet, which is why the other aliens were on the way to destroy Earth.

      I dunno, just my thoughts. I’d welcome some better ideas.

      • For me there was a logical story arc between the opening and the ending.The gardener Engineer (as Scott himself calls him) brings life to earth through sacrifice. Literally millions of years later the engineers (either a breakaway group or officially approved policy) decide to end (or significantly alter) human -nay all-life on earth.Shaw stops it (for now or for ever) by appealing to the captain of the prometheus to sacrifice himself to save life on earth by crashing into the engineers ship (it is not a weapons ship so they have to sort of become suicide bombers).Basically that`s it and as I write this I can sense an irony that the engineers who perhaps are the arbiters of who can do what in the known universe have been defeated.

        Of course the tantilising question is Why destroy what you have spent years creating ? There are a whole host of ideas about that.

        My own opinion is that this seeding of the stars that has been going on for millions of years has resulted in some kind of blowback, a blowback of truly catastrophic proportions which resulted in the engineers as a species being nearly wiped out. So the survivors initiated a policy of rollback to basically destroy all the life worlds that had successfully produced intelligent life. However because of deep traditional/cultural beliefs the engineers are not united on this rollback strategy.The pro-lifers engineers are the more powerful and I think it is these guys that the engineers in the movie are killed by (using of course ritualistic/dare I say holy weaponary – you know who,or at least a more controllable attackdog type variant.)

        Now it`s not all good news because ALL the engineers are deeply committed to the idea of selective sacrifice in rituals depicted on the alien mural in the headchamber. To understand our reaction to this sacrifice it would be similar to the Spanish seeing the human sacrifice practices of the Aztecs a few hundred years ago.

        • Well the name of the ship is Prometheus. The greek god who gave humans fire and was damned by the other gods, with a punishment of his belly being ripped out by a hawk. The Engineers believed in unselfishness, and sacrifice for the greater good. This is where we went wrong. Let me explain this statement: the Engineers were planning to go and destroy Earth roughly 2000 years ago. Now, think of the biggest conflict of the first decade after the birth of christ (Anno Domini). The death of Christ. I believe that because of our brutal acts through that first decade the Engineers sent one of them to sort things out. Jesus Christ. Because he was crucified, The Engineers were done reasoning, and attempted to destroy us. Then the breakout of their weapon.

          • @jewbott11: Ridley Scott said in an interview that it was his original intent to make Christ an Engineer and the action planned 2000 years ago was in retaliation for His Crucifixion. He claimed that idea was discarded as being too obvious, but there is still a LOT of Christ imagery in the film. The sacrifice ritual at the beginning could be depicting a Christ-figure as well.

      • “Perhaps the alien at the beginning was doing this as an act of rebellion, and wasn’t supposed to start a new race of humans on this planet, which is why the other aliens were on the way to destroy Earth.”

        This is a very good observation. The mythological Prometheus, gave fire to man to lessen the gap between them and the gods which was not viewed well by the latter. This Engineer may have caused the evolution on Earth but was not supposed to do so and may be the reason they later wanted to eradicate humanity (getting to close to their creators).

        • The engineer was clearly not rebelling, since the ace continued to visit Earth for millennia after the fact. They only stopped some time around when we started to develop paper records since Shaw only had records on tablets bd cave walls. So it was at least 1000 years BC when the sopped coming, but hey had been guiding our development as a species through at least 6-8 visits, probably more. That is not the work of a lone act of rebellion, and it is nothing like the arc of the mythical Prometheus.

          • You are a huge nerd.

            • Yep. I am a California Registered Professional Civil Engineer, a Caltech graduate, and a fan of science in general. I also see that I can not trust autocorrect on my iPad when I use that fo responding, since there are so many errors above.

              But so what. Do you have to be a nerd in order to want a smart movie. I am not some sci-fi geek who wears a Star Trek uniform to a Renaissance Fayre. Heck, I don’t think I own a singe bit of sci-fi memorabilia worth more than a few bucks.

              I just want a movie to be consistent. Scott created a universe with his movie and should plant his film within that universe. We should not have to watch interviews with him to figure out the back story to huge plot points. Folks want to liken this to the story of Prometheus. Where was the endless suffering of Prometheus who was punished for giving man fire? David is really the only one who is still alive after his ‘death,’ and he is certainly not suffering. He is more like Loki, the trickster God (the same guy from Thor, but so much more interesting). After all Thor (again, not the movie), states that he will remove Loki’s head from his body. If I can trust Neil Gaiman’s research, Loki is finally bound beneath the Earth and the drippings from the fangs of a poisonous snake cause him to writhe in agony, causing earthquakes. Maybe this will be the next Alien follow up, names Asgard.

              • Oh, you had to go there. Uh huh. You just had to pull out the education card, didn’t you. And to think I agree with you with an education based on comic books.

          • I am so glad Matt and Jeff saw this movie so that I could enjoy their hilarious commentary. I only continue dissecting the movie at this point to hear what sort of hilarious rips they reply with.

            Another question/thought on the topic of the engineers’ visits. If they want humans to go to this star, why leave maps? If they are repeatedly returning to the planet, why not just bring some humans back with them when they are ready? And if in fact the engineers were just waiting for humans to be ready, couldn’t they have left a better map? They invented spaceships and the human species, surely they could have done better than a giant man pointing at 5 eggs. This is how we are supposed to find you light years away?

            • This is turning into the thread that won’t die…it’s getting harder to kill it than the alien. There’s even more than one Matt now so they’re multiplying.
              I’m new to screenrant. Is this a typical thread length or has this flawed but controversial film generated more opinions than usual? A lot of fan(antics) here – I’m beginning to wonder how many of us are typing responses while wearing Lawrence of Arabia gear?

              • There is only one of me (I am sure more than a few of you are thanking whatever entities you believe in for that fact).

        • John: Yeah, the mythical Prometheus both created mankind and gave us fire. Did the Engineers create our physical bodies, but the Engineer in the sacrifice ritual gave us something else we’re not supposed to have? Intelligence, souls, free will, a spark of divinity? Were we meant to be just lab rats, but that particular Engineer put us on a level with our Makers?

    • The opening sequence seemed to me to be the start of life on earth. Our creation scene, not why the Engineer did the deed to break his body down and leave his DNA behind to create life on earth is a question I think is left unanswered. The reaction by the engineers though seems to be that they did not like this act and set to working towards eliminating it. They built a military post withing striking distance of earth but before they could deliver their weapons they had a biological leak that killed them all.
      Next Question is: If they were planning to kill all life on earth and had the technology to do it, Why leave the drawings on the walls in caves?

      • The bigger question to the opening scene is not what but when. If the Engineer is indeed seeding the planet with his own DNA in order to introduce life to a lifeless world, then are we to assume that ALL life originated with DNA that is an exact match to Human DNA? Are WE the result of 3 billion years of evolution OR does the Engineer introduce his DNA in order to advance an already established ecosystem involving primates? (perhaps 1 million yrs ago, a la Monolith in 2001 )
        Could explain why the geologist become a super ape after being exposed to vast quantities of goo.

        • Except it is not clear that the same goo was responsible for the Engineer’s dissolution. When the stupid male archeologist (too lazy to look up his name) was fed a drop of the goo from the pods, things started to grow inside him. When the gardener engineer drank his goo, he dissolved. If we share the same DNA (an exact match), then we must have the same basic physiology as the engineers, with environmental differences (diet, gravity…) causing us to look different. so feeding us the same goo should make us dissolve, not hatch little worms in our eyeballs.

          • Matt who hates the movie, I am with you. Lets not also forget that the engineers needed an atmosphere like ours to breath. How did the super ape just start galloping around with a helmet that had been compromised? If there were no holes in the mask, then the goo would not have contacted his face.

            My other big complaint, which is less crucial to the plot line, but important to the believability of the movie, is that none of the characters had met each other before they had all volunteered to take a 2 year trip into the depth of the galaxies under a coma. What are these people motivations? Wouldn’t you want to have an idea of what you were getting yourself into before you took this trip? If I were on this trip and awakened from a 2 year coma only to find out that Freddy Prince Jr was the lead scientist and I would be pissed.

            • Freddy Prince Jr. Haha! Now that’s funny. I knew I’d seen him before.

      • May be the maps were left for us so that when we were advanced enough and perhaps becoming a threat we would find our way to the planet and kill ourselfs kind of a biological fail safe

    • As for the technology, that will happen in any prequel that comes 30 years after… (same with the Star Wars movies) I actually purchased Alien after seeing Prometheus and I had forgotten how awesome the set design is. the only technology that lacks behind is the computer graphics seems like they are using Atari for their computers and screens full of (10001101001001001001001000011111)

      The opening Scene it looks to me like “Creation”
      The engineer in on earth and his DNA gives life to new DNA strands.

      Open questions:

      The fossilized Pilot in Alien could not be sitting on that seat because in Prometheus he went chasing after Elizabeth Shaw. And was left dead after giving “birth” to the Alien. How did he get back yo the pilot seat?

      The creature that attaches to Kane’s face in the original Alien movie is present in Prometheus, but looks a bit different it has no spider like legs… not until Elizabeth Shaw gives birth to that gigantic octopus looking creature… it resembles the original creature just on steroids.

      Does this mean that this is a New kind of Hybrid bread of Alien with human DNA?

      Obviously the engineers were running away from something I assume it was and alien creature that perhaps was born from one of them after serving as a “host body” but was this alien creature different than the Alien born at the end of Prometheus(since it should have different DNA composition…) ?

      Trying to decipher these questions ended me with a headache!!!
      So I just gave up and decided to just enjoy the Prometheus story…

      • I am only slightly bothered by the use of better technology in prequels. With the exception of R2D2′s rocket thrusters in the Star Wars prequels, I know that later film goers are going to expect updated effects, so I am OK. With this movie, the ship in Alien is clearly not a state of the art affair like Prometheus, so I can actually accept that it would not have high end tech. Kind of like the fact that flip phones still exist today.

        For your first two open questions, there is certainly at least one bridging movie between Prometheus and Alien, so how we get the burst open Space Jockey and how the face hugger changes can be explained away.

        The Alien Queen has not been shown yet (the end critter in Prometheus did not have the correct mouth), so I am going to assume it evolves at least one more time in the bridge movie. But then is stops evolving, which seems… odd (I know, who would have imagined inconsistencies). In all the movies following Alien, the xeno is a pretty consistent being. So it goes through a few rapid evolutions (even though it is not mating with either Shaw or the Engineer, merely using it as a host), and then stops evolution, looking like the critter than was in wall mural in the vessel chamber, which suggests… it was engineered to look like this or looked like this all along.

        Why did the 3-D log stop recording when it did? It sure would have been handy if they could have see whatever it was that was chasing the engineers. If it was so close that in the haste to close the door, one of the group was decapitated, it should have been on the holo-log. But no, that would have made too much sense.

        For me, it was impossible to enjoy the story, so I ended up paying attention to all the ways in which the story failed to make sense. The first red flag popped up for me with the first Engineer, then the eye rolling came with the scenes at the cave, and I checked out for good when they met in the Captain’s quarters. At that point I should have just left to go see something believable. Like Madagascar III.

        • for a guy who hated the movie you sure can’t shut up about it.

          i also think it’s hilarious that everyone who took intro to science back in college is now a nasa level expert on things that don’t exist in movies.

          • If I wanted to complain about a lack of reality, I would be griping about a warp 10 spaceship being constructed 70 years into our future with no expository explaination. I just want a smart, consistent movie, especially when it has designs on being smart. I don’t care if it is science fiction, drama or comedy. If you want to be smart, then be smart, especially if it is just as easy to be smart than it is to be stupid and lazy with your film making.

            I walked into this movie hoping for a fun thrill ride that was pretty to look at and presented some interesting ideas. What I got was boring, generlly drab, and silly. All three of the first Alien movies were good. Sure, there were slly elements, but I expect that. But when you want to present grand ideas, don’t be stupid about it.

            DNA seeding of the world at the start – stupid as it was done and easy to make smart
            Paper thin character development – a little tougher to do, but certainly possible
            The whole geo/bio story arc – stupid as it was done and easy to make smarter
            The grand idea of the Engineer’s DNA matching human DNA – stupid as it was done and easy to make smart
            The 3D video log – eyerollingly stupid as it was done, and easy to make smarter.

            Do I need to go on?

            It is sad that the level of scientific education in the US has reduced so many members of the general public to be able to accept this as smart, or even acceptable, movie making. I saw the Avengers and liked it, but I was nto expecting some grand ideas based in reality. The whole concept of panspermia, intergalactic seeding of life, can be well done and presented in scientific way, even if it is a pretty ‘out there’ idea. Clearly the film makers wanted to tie into that concept. Just as clearly, at least to those of us that demand a little intelligence behind the lens, they failed.

            • “DNA seeding of the world at the start – stupid as it was done and easy to make smart”

              Not even necessarily Earth, even if it is, what he dissolves into may simply interact with the current biology on the planet in different ways. Much like the goo that was a biological weapon interacted differently with various lifeforms, changing them completely.

              “Paper thin character development – a little tougher to do, but certainly possible”

              I don’t understand what kind of development you were looking for. It’s a two hour movie and no one in Alien or Aliens ever struck me as deep, rich characters. But you liked those.

              “The whole geo/bio story arc – stupid as it was done and easy to make smarter”

              It was supposed to be ironic, as were the way in which they died. Seemed fitting to and pretty good to me.

              “The grand idea of the Engineer’s DNA matching human DNA – stupid as it was done and easy to make smart”

              Seemed like a pretty good way to quickly move the story along in the direction they wanted without a lot of needless discussions. Otherwise it’s like that Futurama episode, since you like cartoons, where they mock how Sci-Fi films need to stop and take something complex and compare it to something “common” people will understand. “The engine is going to explode… like a balloon with too much air!”

              “The 3D video log – eyerollingly stupid as it was done, and easy to make smarter.”

              Already addressed this. It moves the story forward without having to needlessly sit around and watch an android go through 2,000 years of dead video. You could also say the video picked up where the last incident took place. The log also seemed to follow them, which we also don’t know what took place beyond the door other than the comment, “This place is a tomb”. You don’t know what other logs were taking place throughout the rest of that huge compound.

              • You win Jimmy. I am out. This will be my last post on this movie. You are absolutely correct, it is way more enjoyable to sit around with a bunch of sycophants and talk about movies you all liked. You must have a blast with your Twilight friends.

                It is also impossible to hold an intelligent debate with a person who’s arguments boil down to: “I don’t need things to be smart,” and “Androids can do anything.”

                If the opening of the movie was not on Earth, the clear implication is that something similar happened on Earth. So instead of interacting with a species of animal which shares the vast percentage of our DNA and directly implying that the aliens directly led to human evolution (we are a perfect match for their DNA), they would rather spill their seed in the gutter and hope for the best.

                Hand picked crew of scientists that are dumb as a collective bag of hammers. One of the two potentially most complex characters reduced to sulking in the corner and having sex with the captain because… he asked??? The two co-pilots, 2/3 of the group who must act in concert in order to save Earth from certain doom, have conversations only about the bet they made and who won. Cut the characters out if they serve no purpose other than fogging a mirror.

                Of course the arc of the geologist and the biologist seemed pretty good to you. You don’t demand anything resembling intelligence from your entertainment dollar. I want more. Red Letter Media had a great take on this. The biologist has no interest in looking at a creature that has been dead for 1,000s of years, but has no problem petting the space worm that is acting like a cobra. The Geologist who is in charge of mapping gets lost early in the movie, goes off exploring when he is stuck in the cave, and ten is able to find his way out from the exact same location with his face being eaten off by the goo. I do not think ironic means what you think it means.

                I actually don’t watch Futurama, though I have nothing against it. I am more a South Park kind of guy. But I don’t like sci-fi taking the time to explain to the dimmer bulbs in the crowd. That was my biggest issue with Inception. It really was not that tough to follow, but they had to keep explaining it anyway. When they missed the kick driving off the bridge, the important team members knew that there would be another kick when they hit the water. They immediately started acting to take advantage of that kick. We did not have to have the explanation fed to Ellen Paige as a proxy for the audience. Move forward and let the clueless catch up later.

                Sorry, but the magical android is not cutting it. It did not cut it when you argued it before. It does not cut it now. And it is not going to cut it in the future. The fact that the power supply, central processing unit and motor supply are all housed in his head is hard enough to buy. Was it Ash or Bishop that they had to be repowered externally when his head was ripped off? But it takes 30 seconds of screen time to establish a scene that shows David fast forwarding through the future video logs. The fact that the did not set up any of his abilities, though they could have, is lazy film making. especially when they they did set up his ability to communicate with the Engineers by not only showing David learning early Earth languages, but then had a scene where he was specifically asked if he could communicate with them. Talk about spoon feeding us. So for a scene where he never really communicates with them, we get 2 set up scenes. For all his magical abilities to interact with alien technology, we get none.

                So I am done. You failure to actually present an argument is not your fault. Science education has been going down hill for decades. I just hope that you were not subject to a teacher who wanted to present both sides to the whole debate over evolution. Maybe you were. Maybe that is why you accept magical intervention as a valid idea. Look at the level of political discourse today. It has basically broken down to one side pointing at the other and screaming that they (they other side) are wrong. No one need present a counter argument that actually hold water. It is enough to yell NO! If our supposed statesmen of the day result to this tactic, how can I expect more from an anonymous entity posting on the web.

                Good luck to you. I just hope that The Dark Knight Rises isn’t stupid. We might be at this again over a movie I really hoped would be smart.

                • You’ll be back in 10 minutes trying to act like your freshman science back in 1980 designates you the expert on everything. Haha.

                  Regardless, if the movie had been written for you it’d be 6 hours long and documentary style. It’s a movie and you were looking for science, I was looking for art. Was everything perfect? No, but that’s every movie and you’ve listed some pretty bad ones that you liked, so I don’t know where you come off as high and mighty. I don’t like all of Scott’s titles, but I do like his Sci-Fi.

                  Cry me a river that you have to pout about my responses. I’ve offered you explanations every time and you just ignore them and swell up with tears about trivial science and the fact that the characters did dumb things and suffered accordingly… which… again, was the point that GregM and I have been trying to make… the point you just don’t get. That’s fine, you don’t like it, we get it.

                  Also, not everyone on the crew gets an hour of onscreen time development… sorry. Maybe in the Director’s cut all your favorites will become your new best fictional friends you’ll like them so much. But for the big screen, 2 hours is what you generally get. Hopefully Ridley will make the Finnigan’s Wake of Sci-Fi movies so you can feel 100% satisfied with absolutely everything. Because otherwise, tears tears, what a waste and our school systems are a bust! Coming from the guy who got his mythology / world religion lessons from Neil Gaiman… Feel free to come down from your pedestal when TDK rolls out… because I’m sure when that comes out you’ll be an expert on the justice system from reading John Grisham and watching Knight Rider.

                  Other people might be impressed with your laughable 5th grade deconstruction… I just think you’re looking for attention… cause you aren’t looking for responses that don’t agree with you and I’ve never seen someone rant for so long about a film they didn’t like. Someone who liked it, may be even lukewarmly, but wants to debate certain aspects? Sure. But move on ;]

                • Ouch…talk about talking someone down gently. You have to remember you may be talking to some soccer kids here who grew up thinking that since everyone got a trophy, everyone’s playing on a level playing field. What was it David said? “Big things have small beginnings.” I was going to suggest to you baby steps Matt…baby steps. But you threw down and it’s all over.

                  Like I said elsewhere, I’m a film snob. To save yourself some time and typing, try a litmus test, like asking that movie goer if he or she liked the ending of No Country For Old Men. The answer is all you need to know.

                  I spent $12.50 on Prometheus but I have to say I’ve found more enjoyment reading yours and jimmy’s “discussions”, albeit a bit one-sided in the arena of debate, but as Abe Lincoln once said, “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and…”. I forget the rest but enough said.

                  • yeah, can’t recover from that. i’m drowning in all those tears. you win, ok jimmy? you win! you responded to each of my points, man! our school systems are junk! you don’t agree with me about prometheus! back in my day we read sunday comic strips and got religion and mythology from neil gaimon!

                    man, you got me with no country for old men. i mean, only a film snob like yourself who doesn’t settle for anything would like that! i mean, the ending, WHOA. just the ending. i mean, whoa. the ending.

                    you two are cute how you qualify your intelligence on random things. literally, i couldn’t be more impressed.

                    • One person’s sense of randomness is another’s sense of perspective.

                    • not sure if that’s you trying to be deep or if you just opened a dove chocolate and shared the inside wrapper with us all.

            • Spot on Matt. I completely agree.

          • I may not be a scientist per se but I have played one. As far as being a NASA level expert, I do consider myself a movie snob of the highest degree. And the fact that a simple level of authenticity in the characters’ behaviors doesn’t exist in this movie is exactly why it falls short for me. Is Prometheus watchable? Yes, it was for me to a degree. But is it a great movie or even a very good movie? Uh…no.

            • did one of those discovery channel shops need someone to dress up like einstein and hand out brochures? played one. hehe. cute.

              snob of the highest degree? whoa, i better listen you then. my bad. i didn’t know you had those qualifications prior.

              • I’m glad you appreciated my sense of sarcasm. You should try it sometime.

                • ok

                  did one of those discovery channel shops need someone to dress up like einstein and hand out brochures? played one. hehe. cute.

                  snob of the highest degree? whoa, i better listen you then. my bad. i didn’t know you had those qualifications prior.

    • As far as how the alien creature at the end looked, it may just be that we’re only seeing the beginning of the alien species seen in the earlier movies. I have the impression there will at least be a sequel or two to Prometheus, and the alien creatures may very well change further as the story progresses.

      As for the look itself, I liked how the alien used its pointy head spike to dig itself out of the corpse. I haven’t seen Alien (sorry for the blasphemy), but this seems to offer some sort of biological explanation for the elongated head.

    • the reason the alien is different is that it changes depending on the host example: Alien & Aliens had human hosts and were simmaler and bipedal
      Alien 3 came from a dog or cow depending on the cut you watch and was mostly on all fours
      Alien Vs Predator 1/2 theres the alien predator hybrid
      so it was really quite interesting seeing how it came out but wat i want to know is why it came out fully grown and not small and white AND whats up with the facehuggers? (not directed at u just some general questions)

  3. I have a degree in the sciences (I know, good for you) and have failed enough science labs in school to be aware of the scientific method. I was initially excited to see a geologist on board with a speaking part but then cringed to see him reduced to the equivalent of the black character always getting killed off first (am I right Vanessa?). I admit I would be somewhat anxious about raising a door but the dead body had been there for quite awhile so my anxiety would have been assuaged through observation and deduction. My biggest disappointment however was the inability/laziness/ignorance of the writer and perhaps director (the buck stops with whom?) to create characters that behave in a reasonable and contextual manner considering the monumental task at hand. Even the space shuttle Challenger’s perhaps least credentialed astronaut was a high school teacher and I do believe she would have had the presence of mind to approach the unidentified species with extreme caution and distance (even Ash instructed Ripley to use a pointer rather than extending a hand into a tight space). There have been previous posters that allow for stupid behavior by some of Prometheus’ characters to move along the action but that’s an oh so tired cliche more suitable for a brainless slasher film. I may be dating myself but here’s the best example of a movie that involves scientists behaving like scientists: “The Andromeda Strain” by Robert Wise. TAS was for me at the height of science fiction because hey, it incorporated science!!! Michael Chrichton apparently had been around enough scientists in his day or at least was cognizant of the scientific method because the protagonists behaved appropriately. I realize Prometheus was not a national venture but I would have thought Vickers required a higher standard of professionalism in her crew. There is no loss in pacing if characters are written as intelligent and self-aware; in fact, it would have created more gravitas in their actions and consequences. Good writing does that. If you have to resort to watching additional material to help define what the director was aiming for, then the notion of a stand-alone film falls apart.

    • well said. The biologist is there presumably to analyze any biological life they find. So he runs away at first sight? Then he treats the alien snake-thingy like a shy dog? I totally agree that they wouldn’t have lost anything excitement-wise by making the scientists, you know, smart.

      • Because smart scientists and a real scientific method has ever made for a good show… There’s not enough backstory to the biologist to care, he’s a vehicle for the main points of the g****** movie, namely the beginning of the Alien.

        So there.

        • That is letting Scott get away with lousy film making. Contact had smart scientists. 2001 was smart about how they handeledl the influence of the monolith. You can very easily portray scientists as careful and actually interested in… well… science, without making a boring film. You don’t have to make qthese guys do double bling experiments, just make them at least as intelligent as a 3rd grader. Weird looking space worm that seems to be displaying a warning behavior not unlike a cobra, let’s not touch it. Have it he scientist back away and another one comes up from behind. Don’t try and pet the stupid thing.

          • Exactly Matt. Didn’t the stupid biologist slightly remind you of “Newman” in Jurassic Park?

            • Yes, that’s a good comparison Jon. Except Nedry was a program developer, not a biologist. I could see Nedry dismissing the threat of an unknown (to him) species; he was acting in character. Prometheus’ biologist and geologist must have bought their degrees from some online website. Apparently Vickers was too busy to check on their qualifications while dealing with her confused take on David’s Oedipus complex. Wait a minute!!! Where was their mother??? If the next feature in this franchise is titled Oedipus, well…you read it here first.

              • Wikipedia has a good article on Damon Lindelof which explains a lot about why many of us are exasperated with the script.

                He was also responsible for Cowboys vs. Aliens (another relative fail) and was heavily influenced by The Prisoner and Twin Peaks when writing “Lost”

                You don’t say, Damon?

                All three series had the same wandering, incoherent, endless plots – and this is what we get from Prometheus – surprise, surprise.

                God help us if he’s savaged Star Trek’s reboot too.

              • “biologist and geologist must have bought their degrees from some online website”

                Soon … even brick & mortar schools will be fully online. I’ve seen schools like Univ of Maryland, Penn State, and Columbia Univ offer online programs.

                I guess credentials, post-2050, will probably involve having applicants submit comprehensive subject exams to the Weyland Corp or perhaps the company, itself, will administer them to weed out the diploma mill crowd.

                But yeah, those hacks were beyond pathetic for wanting to adopt a new pet, during first contact with an alien rattlesnake.

        • The back story is that he was identified as a biologist so the audience should be able to anticipate a certain behavior and methodology for this character. The way the script was written, that character could just as easily been identified as the ship’s janitor (and please, I’m not disparaging janitors – they have a job to do too) with all the technique he displayed upon encountering the alien species. At least the janitor would have prodded the worm with a broom stick!!!

          • The biologist did wear sandles though, at least Scott got something right ;)

        • “Because [no] smart scientists and a real scientific method has ever made for a good show…

          So there.”

          Perhaps I’m misreading this audience for a much-anticipated precursor to one of our great science fiction films. Perhaps I’m confusing these satisfied Prometheus fans and Ridley Scott with Barry Sonnenfeld and his Men In Black franchise. Oops…sorry, my bad.

    • Have you seen Contagion?

      • I don’t have a lot of money so I try to use some simple guidelines to save me a wasted expense. One of them is “Do not see a movie with Jude Law in it.” There may be a couple of gems in there somewhere or perhaps one of my other guidelines may overrule the Jude Law guideline but if you think about it, you’ll see that it’s money well worth not spent.

    • yes! this was my biggest problem with the movie. beyond needing consistency in the presentation of theme and motif, there was absolutely no caution whatsoever when approaching this alien world.

      They had a ship full of scientists! and yet every character falls into the cliche of the brainless slasher film teenager. I get it. they couldn’t waste screentime running data and taking samples of this planet before they decided to wander around it, sure. but they were doing atmosphere readings AS they were entering the atmosphere! seriously? and what about the rest of the planet they so eagerly ignore? they literally decided to exclusively explore the very first thing they see, and don’t go anywhere else.

      i mean. that all aside. there were some pretty interesting metaphors going on that i have different thoughts on. but i feel like the blatant disregard for any sense of the scientific method or caution whatsoever when these people are supposed to be scientists needs to be noted. i left the theater thinking, “well of course they all died! they’re morons who tried to pet aliens and didn’t tell anyone when they thought they might be infected with something and woke our alien creator mid-nap!”

  4. I liked this movie. It isn’t the story of what happened on that moon in the first Alien, but I dare say those ‘Space Jockeys’ suffered a similar fate. Remember it wasn’t established in the first Alien when that Jockey ship crashed or was destroyed(whatever). The age of the ship on LV-426 was never really established. If it looked very old that could due to weathering effects of an extreme environment or simply the difficulty of dating something never seen before and of alien manufacture.

    Anyway I went to see this movie for the effects. Like the original ‘Alien’ this movie succeeds as a design statement. It is eye candy and pleasant to watch.

    Some gripes:

    1) The scientist couldn’t possibly be so active after surgery. I mean there’s suspending belief and there is complete f’ing nonsense.

    2)The couldn’t conduct a radio carbon dating without calibrating for local concentrations of isotopic carbon(local being the place where the Engineer spends most of its life, probably not LV-223) It would vary from planet( a closed environment) to planet.(I’m a total science nerd)

    3)Why did David doom the scientist by contaminating his bubbly. What motivated THAT!

    4)Did anyone notice that the Engineers looked like Greco-Roman sculpture. Maybe Michaelangelo’s David is a fossil. Just about the right size. LOL

    5)Why did they have to kill Vickers. Mrs. Theron is just too damned good looking to not avail yourself of.

    6)Its good to Idrs-Stringer Bell-Elba on the big screen. Where was that sex scene between Cap. and Vickers. Missed frikkin’ opportunity.

    • Xana – ditto 1,3,5 & 6!

    • Not just the surgery, but the amount of future-morphine crap she injected herself with

      • @Xanadookey and Tripp Deez: There may be an explanation for Shaw’s superhuman vitality both during her self-Caesarean and all her running and leaping like an Olympic heptathlete afterwards. Maybe her boyfriend’s contaminated sperm changed her own DNA. Started her transformation into becoming an Engineer herself? If she grows enough she could fit into the Engineers’ uniforms and end up as the Space Jockey from “Alien”.

    • The only reason to NOT show the sex scene would be if Vickers is also in fact a robot. But she gets crushed by a rolling donut (that she tries to escape by running directly in line with its path) and her father is dead, so that point is now moot. And we didn’t see the sex scene. Was that interaction comic relief or just a tease?

    • Xanadookey: 4) Yeah, Ridley just added opaque black eyeballs and baldness to give them an unearthly appearance. Same color as white marble, too. The Engineer in the sacrifice ritual didn’t have nipples, so they apparently have eliminated the most unnecessary feature in biology – male nipples.

  5. David slipped the little thing that he found into the scientist’s drink shortly after their discussion about attaining their goals. “What would you do to achieve your goal for science? Just about anything? ” ( Exact wording?). They acknowledged it by an approving look.

  6. Greeting,

    I haven’t flushed this idea all the way out but….

    Perhaps humans are the creators after all. Humans created the ‘engineers’. We humans are already well on our way to attempting genetic manipulation. Our desire to create the ‘perfect’ human is pretty clear. So maybe these ‘engineers’ are the result of gene manipulation by humans from another more advanced planet of humans. And maybe these ‘engineers’ were eventually used as slaves to do our bidding ad they ended up resenting it. They managed to discover our gene secrets and it was the engineers who created the xenos to fight against their human oppressors. This could possibly explain the archeology cave drawings FROM THE ADVANCED HUMANS, given to the less advanced humans on earth, as secret maps pointing humans to their ultimate enemy (the engineers).

    Anyway, it’s a thought with a bunch of holes no doubt, but maybe it will spur something.


    • Sure, you mean “fleshed” … gracious, I hope you do!

      • Yeah, fleshed, heh ;)

      • Nope, flushed was the correct term.

        • Matt: “Was there a single thought provoking idea in the entire movie beyond the general question of, “why is this so stupid?””

          Matt: “First off – I loved the movie!”

          I always enjoy responses from the Cognitive Dissonance crowd, thanks!

          • The likely scenario is that there are more than one “matt” on this thread. If you read the entire thread, it’s apparent that there are no conflicting belief systems held by “matt” but rather two matts – one who was willing to suspend beliefs to an exaggerated degree and the other more than willing to point out the degree in difficulty in said suspension.

          • Since they do not require unique names in this board, you could either assume that there is only one Matt, and he posted lots of critiques of the movie over the last week, consistently writing how it was terrible, stupid, made no sense, and was a perfect example of lazy filmmaking, and then suffered a stroke and also posted that he loved the movie, or you could assume that there are two of us.

            My suggestion… Assume that there are two of.

            • But I like the idea of a stroke – it lends a more interesting story line where the “matt” character displays cognitive dissonant behavior much like those found in some of the characters of Prometheus. You know, like “I’m a biologist” and proceed to act like a 5-year old on an Easter egg hunt.

              Hey…there’s that Easter tie in!!!

              • I like where you are going with this. Can you flesh it out a bit more ;)

          • I missed where Matt said this initially, or perhaps RE just summarized, but I just laughed out loud at this! HA!

    • Re: Excellent theory. I figured we’d find out that there was a race more highly-evolved than the Engineers who used them as pawns, but I didn’t guess that it might have been us. That would justify their plan to get rid of us by unleashing millions of Aliens on Earth. That’s pretty horrible, but they would really hate and resent us for good reason. Also, the great thing about sci-fi is that there’s always an easy explanation. So the sacrificial ritual at the beginning could be anywhere or anytime. Just claim time-travel or inter-dimensional transportation using black holes or something. Ridley Scott will take his time making the sequel/sequels, so we’ll be speculating about “Prometheus” for years to come. Looks like the next one will involve Shaw and David going to the Engineers’ home planet, but who knows? That may be too obvious for good old Ridley, so he’ll come up with a totally different concept.

  7. The true irony of this movie is that The Engineers – our creators – turn out to be horrible people. Except for the act of self sacrifice at the movie’s beginning, everything we learned of them in the movie is bad – from their creation of the terrible Alien bio-weapon to The Survivor’s homicidal fit upon awakening from a 2000 year sleep. What are the movie producers trying to say here? Maybe the point is that some questions are better not answered.

    • I think their modus of operandi was to hire a writer capable of stringing along an audience over the course of six seasons with an endless supply of forks in the road and dead ends (confession: I could not stomach more than a couple of episodes of Lost), and armed with the knowledge that there is a three episode cycle involved (i.e., another franchise), have him throw a whole bunch of half-baked scenarios that undernourished Alien fans will pick up and run with until the next episoade, knowing full well that given just a smidgen of possibility, fan boys will fill in the missing holes and provide conjecture for the next two years. Instead of settling for a masterpiece, the producers and writer and perhaps the director opted to go for more money. You know, sorta like Bob Arum, boxing, and the whole Manny Pacquio fiasco. Why settle for one when you can have cycle?

      • Oh Jeff, you’re such a cynic.. and most likely to some extent – correctamundo

        • I know…but when you throw less punches, land less punches, and have a lower percentage of punches landed, you are not going to win the fight. At least that’s the way I’ve always seen it, right?

          I wonder if Damon Lindelof wrote the script for Pacquio vs. Bradley.

    • The true irony is that there are people who are defending the movie on its merits. I could understand liking the pretty shots, though there were really only a few. I could understand (maybe) appreciating a flawed attempt at a deeper movie than just another long chase and gore fest. I do think that this is far less a crass attempt to revisit the well than the 4th movie was. I think that Scott and company really wanted to make a deep film. Maybe that film exists, but it is on the cutting room floor. It would not be the first time his vision was compromised by a studio’s perceived need for greater mass appeal. But sadly, I doubt this last allowance is true. At least when Kill Bill came out, it was named Part I. We knew there was going to be more

    • (don’t know why I was cut off mid sentence. Must have been my alter ego who loved the film trying to stop the message…)

      Anyway, we knew there would be more to Kill Bill, so we could excuse the fact the story was incomplete. This is not Part I, at least not by name. We know there will be another movie, but this one should have been a complete story not itself.

      • The movie did leave me with a lot of questions, but I felt that the movie hinted several times that there would be more answers to come. Do we need a “Part 1″ to know that Hollywood has a sequel in the works for just about any movie that might make money?

        • I know that there will be sequels, but each sequel should be a self contained story, unless they tell us it is Part I.

          • good god man, if you talk this much about movies you think are terrible, i’d hate to know how much you have to say about ones you like…

    • Timotheus: Maybe the awakened Engineer used the brains of the humans assembled around him as terminals and accessed the total information of Earth. After he processed all the data he thought: “What the heck?”. Obviously we’re disappointing, unworthy, dangerous and possibly even a future threat to the Engineers themselves. The ancient maps may been to inspire humans to one day appear before the Engineers in person in order to be judged. It’s significant (not sure why, though) that he attacked David first. Then he killed Weyland and his attendants and launched his ship to go to Earth and annihilate mankind. But he was foiled by the Captain and his two Mates: The Holy Trinity, Christ and the two thieves on Golgotha, the three nails of Christ, the three days of the Crucifixion, the Third Day He was risen…?

  8. i havent been back to watch it a second time yet but did anyone else notice in the scene where David is looking at the holo diary of the events on the ship and in the stasis/pilot room, when the massive star map came up it highlighted a few different galaxies/solar systems before targeting ours then sub targeting earth. did the engineer that was in stasis get into the stasis pod after setting an autopilot and why go into stasis if there’s a xeno outbreak? do them galaxies highlighted corrispond with the number of ships in the valley? was each ship assigned a different target, maybe other experiments or seeded planets in other solar systems?

    did they really vist earth again or are the cave paintings the result of genetic memory and possible warning introduced into the ecosystem by the saviour we see sacrificing himself at the start?

    i have a feeling we are going to get a pulp fiction type storyline where the story only really falls into place at the end. if so i hope it’s not too long before they make the next one.

    • Except Pulp Fiction paid off in the end. I am OK with non-linear story telling. You just have to tell a story.

      • I’m with Matt (this one) on this.

        My first screenplay was very non-linear, but pretty much everything except for small budgetary constraints, dovetails at the end.

        The same for the one I’m writing at the moment which derives some inspiration (but no ideas) from Inception and Triangle.

        The beginning of the story makes little sense until the you see the end.

        • let’s hope the story is there just not been told yet though i can’t think why he would do this as it could hurt future sales.

          i refuse to beleive he would make such a bad film or let the writers get away with this as it is.

          did the chicken or the egg come first? the vase placments the head and the alien carvings inside the payload chamber makes me think they found the egg first, even had perfect conditions unlike lv 426. did predators have circular ships? that engineer did look a bit shocked at the reaction to his drinking the goo.

    • mark: Nice work. My favorite scene was the sacrifice ritual, so that’s what I’ve been pondering the most. Hadn’t thought of your idea. Hopefully, this “Lost” guy will give it all a proper wind-up and doesn’t keep cranking out endless obfuscation just for the sake of being convoluted and keeping things going indefinitely. But the next one won’t be for a few years, I don’t think.

  9. An OK movie (lots of flaws, and unbelievably bad characterization, especially of presumed professional scientists), but with some great philosophical themes.

    I loved the God/Daddy/Maker issues. It’s a perfect mirror of your typical dysfunctional parent/child relationship (to greater or lesser degree). For example:

    1. Parent/creator/maker has high hopes for offspring in act of creation.

    2. Offspring initially puts parent/creator/maker on a pedestal. Wants to meet parent/creator/maker. Believes that parent/creator/maker loves child.

    3. Parent/creator/maker is disappointed that offspring did not turn out as planned. Thinks it has the right to destroy offspring or remake it closer to original plan.

    4. Offspring now has own life, not willing to be destroyed. Rejects parent/creator/maker.

    5. Necessary rejection of each other takes place for offspring to take on own life, and not seek justification from parent.

    It played out over and over in the film: Weyland’s creation but also contempt for David; David’s disgust with humans; the Engineers’ decision to wipe out humans after creating them and apparently investing a few million years in them; Shaw’s anger at the Engineers thinking they can create humans, but then throw them in the trash bin when they don’t quite turn out as planned; Holloway and Shaw’s shock and anger at the Engineers’ apparent betrayal of their creations – they thought their maker would adore their human creations and instead they despised them.

    It’s a good idea – the act of creation not as some supremely orchestrated and perfectly executed plan, but botched, messy, often accidental, and full of errors that you later have to clean up.

    A good metaphor for humans today – making technological advances willy-nilly, with little thought for what might happen, and whether we can keep control of it when it does.

    • I like Lilly’s take – it echoes perhaps the most significant story arc of Blade Runner where Roy doesn’t take kindly to his maker’s decision to have built in a shelf life for the replicants. This also sorta ties into the story of Prometheus and the lesson that is one shouldn’t mess with the gods. Maybe Ridley Scott should have recruited Rutger Hauer to ghost write another memorable line or two. I think ol’ Rutger could have come up with something better than “We were wrong!”

      • Perhaps Weilland is an extention of Roy, seeking out the Engineers to say “I want more life…f***er”

      • Brings up a question … why didn’t Tyrell either call security or make up a BS story about how he could have extended Roy’s life? Then, during the medical procedures, the Blade Runners (or even the military) could show up and ‘expire’ them.

        Instead, he was basically setting himself up to be target, since Roy wouldn’t have any reason to keep him alive any longer, other than out of some foolish *awe* of Tyrell’s brilliance, as a biomedical engineer. Was Tyrell that vain and stupid?

  10. Seems to me that if we descended from these proto-humans, they are entitled to at least as much moral/practical ambivalence as we (the descendants) have. Why do peoples chose to supersede others? The ‘engineers’ ‘ choice to terminate us seems secondary to me. Like Ridley said later, you don’t see the (aliens) f’n each-other-over for a percentage. The aliens are a bio weapon, set free by ambition or secondary ineptitude.
    In a practical sense, the producer, Walter Hill, bears an important primary position here (of course). He develops the script and other hirings, including the director. And yes, this shadow-play’s greater ailing is enemic character development. Seems unfulfilling for no good reason.

  11. FWIW the last word David said to the engineer was no doubt ‘creator’.

    It seemed he may have said something like, “I am not human and this is my creator.”

    or “I am an artificial person made in your image and this is my creator.”

  12. I haven’t seen any references here to the meaning of the ending, mea culpas if I missed them, but it seemed to me that Doc Noomi was fooling David at the end, playing on his drive for knowledge by telling him that they were going to the Engineers’ home world for the ultimate answers, when in reality she had plans to dump the whole whole ship’s cargo of nasty alien buggahs on the Engineers and wipe them out in revenge. I thought that angle reasonably neatly tied up the prequel connection, bringing the Aliens into dominance in that part of the universe, but of course, this is all just conjecture.

    • One can only hope she was double dealing David, since she should have figured out he was serving his own agenda throughout. Though considering her overall intelligence, that may be wishing for too much.

      Still there is no reason for us to assume she was lying to him. She could earnestly have wanted to go to their home world, and he could have either tricked her to head to another moon, or mistakenly taken her to another moon, and another installation, thus setting up Alien.

    • This is a very interesting idea Dominic. Perhaps the other planet they visit is LV426. The original planet. They crash for whatever reason, the aliens on board leak out and kill everything on board and even the super human who climbs into the big chair to try and fly away. He gets zapped and the ship is dead but it also pushes out a warning beacon which Ripley and the Nostromo pick up. Remember in Alien, Ripley and the super computer Mother decrypt it and she says “it sounds like a warning”. …

  13. Here’s another thing or 2 that i noticed:

    Not all of the bodies had chest bursting holes and the holes were significantly smaller than the hole left by the Xeno-thingy at the end.

    So, since there were no giant squidy things to impregnate space jockeys, Because there were no infected humans having sex to produce giant squidy things, then, what emerged from the chests or wounds left in the dead bodies

    Am I to believe that there was no life on earth, but there was water, (which is the key to all life)

    Why didnt the space jockey just cut his throat or slit his wrists and bleed out instead of drinking a formula, that corroded and erroded its body only to fall into water and the water either repaired the remaining Jockeys DNA or created new DNA

    Why didnt Shaw tell anyone what she gasve birth to, she had plenty of opportunities

    why couldnt we see what David was saying to the Jockey

    Why didnt the Jockey make any sounds at all

    Why cant we assume that there are many types of Jockeys, since there are many types of humans, there are good and bad humans, why cant we assume that there are good and bad jockeys.

    Still baffles as to why the doctor wanted to play coochie coo with a mutated worm cobra snake looking thing that he’s never seen before?

    Since there is no way man was a threat to the jockeys, there have to be another explanation as to who else they were at war with

  14. I haven’t read or heard anything about what I consider to be the biggest goof in the movie, or perhaps I’m getting something wrong. I presume that the ship discovered by the Prometheus crew is the same one that the crew of the Nostromo will later rediscover in “Alien”. The Nostromo crew explore the stasis/bridge room and find the body of the Last Engineer at the controls with his midsection burst open from the inside. However, the Last Engineer left his ship to come after Dr. Shaw and was attacked and “birthed” the new xenomorph in Vickers’ pod. How do we reconcile this fact?

    • Um…the planet in Alien is LV-426….the planet in Prometheus is LV-223…different planet, different ship…

      • Not necessarily a different ship. Don’t forget that the team from the Nostromo made the assumption that (what turned out to be) the suit of the Space Jockey was the exoskeleton of an entity. Could it be possible that, with David’s aid, Shaw would be able to don that immense suit? And could it be possible that she is still infected with a growing alien? Several times during the film’s climax she doubled over in pain, presumably due to the operation, but could she have a future chest burster inside her? Could Shaw be the “original” Space Jockey?

        • One would hope that the most sophisticated medical apparatus created by man, of which only 10 were made, would be able to remove all of a foreign body.

          It could be possible that there are more Engineers on the ship she stole, and it is likely there are more pods on her ship, so there are lots of way to get the space jockey money shot at the end of the next film beyond the never-before-seen-in-this-franchise possibility of her carrying twins.

          • Didn’t she essentially do a quick “jury-rig” of the machine’s operating process because she found it had been calibrated for male patients? Given that, there may be room for an incomplete or imperfect procedure.

            • “Calibrated for male patients” was an eye rolling moment that I let pass. So too, for the most part, the fact that she was only closed externally, and her uterine walls would be cut and she would be bleeding internally.

              A robor operating system, that can theoretically perform any operation needed, on any part of the body, of which only 10 were made, doesn’t have enough memory in the computer systems to hold operating instructions for females and males, let alone just about any animal that fit into the unit? I would expect it to be able to operate on dogs, cats and chickens without any modifications. But I digress.

              The unit identified a foreign body (I wonder if it was just the alien, or the uterus as well, since that would be pretty foreign on a male patient) and removed it in tact. It would be completely unfounded (but judging by the rest of the movie, consistent) to assume that a second seed was left behind. How it grew with nothing to eat is a bit of a head scratcher.

              • The pod being designed to handle a male was specifically:

                A) To display the fact that the whole expedition was simply for Weyland and his level of “self-absorbed”. It wasn’t to find grand answers for humanity, it was for one man.

                B) To display Weyland’s utter and complete contempt for his own, flesh and blood daughter. He even goes so far at the start of the film to state how David is essentially his son and completely ignores his daughter. The artificial intelligence is more important to him and the only thing his daughter has on David is a soul.

                It’s not that it couldn’t have been made to handle a woman, it’s that it WASN’T made to handle a woman that is important. You’re supposed to realize the significance when it announces it only supports males. Remember back when Weyland’s daughter and Shaw reference it… no one says, “There only so many made and it’s too bad it only handles one sex.” They BOTH think it’s there for EVERYONE :]

                But that seems to be what most people are centering on, the “it can’t” or “he/she shouldn’t have” instead of the significance / implications of the technology and the decisions.

        • no, but with the plot holes already exposed, anything is possible…

  15. Was it just me or was the engineer’s ship in the beginning a different shape than the engineer’s ship at the end? //
    We only assume that the cave paintings show these giant creatures pointing to “directions” to LV 223 but we all know what happens when we ASSume…i mean, they could just as easily have been threatening our ancestors a-la, “i brought you into this world and i can take you out” sentiment. If that were to be the case, the expedition ceases to be a trap and instead becomes curiosity killing the cat. If i remember correctly, there was a linear time table of “visits” to Earth. Why do we have to go out and try to find these creatures, based on extremely ancient hieroglyphics when it seems like they intend to keep returning? I mean, if they intended the cave paintings to be directions, why would they give them to us at a time when it was impossible to leave Earth? If we had waited, instead, for them to come back… yea, they might have just ended up exterminating us BUT we might have also finally been advanced enough to understand more from them and ultimately answered the questions we went to LV 223 to ask!

  16. I’m not sure why everyone is so confused. Ridley Scott pretty much spells everything out through images or the characters flat out tell you the story. David tells you everything you need to know: Children want to kill their parents, the engineers were on the way to earth before everything went wrong, sometimes you must kill before you can create. There were images of dna and life forming after the engineer drank the liquid in the beginning.

    Why is everyone so surprised that David tried to trick the scientists and impregnate Shaw? The artificial persons did that in every Alien movie.

    • I don’ think most of us who disliked the movie were confused, rather we were disappointed. The issue for me is that things were either horrible telegraphed, not foreshadowed in the least, or based on very poor science and/or the blatant stupidity of the characters.

      Yes, the engineer dissolved his body and the DNA broke apart, and then recombined in the water. But Shaw was so amazed that the engineer DNA was an exact match for human DNA. Not just made up of the same base pairs, but a match. So the engineer’s DNA spontaneously formed human precursors or humans, or we share the exact same DNA with every living critter on earth. Since the first is not how DNA works and the second is not true, then the opening make no sense. Infect a group of primates, spawning human evolution, or temper the excitement to where we share similar DNA characteristics, and the issue resolves itself. No less compelling, no more time taken, and infinitely more realistic.

      • for a guy who thought the movie was terrible you sure can’t stop talking about it. i’d hate to be around when you see something you do like.

        you know what i do when i see something i don’t like? move on. camping screenrant for weeks sounds good too i guess.

        • Well, the website IS called screen rant. It’s a lot more interesting if there are differences of opinion even if some of us think the other opinions are short-sighted. Why ruin the fun? I’d hate to visit that other website – screenrantforsycophants.

          • i’m just going to assume you’re matt so he can continue posting after saying he wasn’t going to continue posting and compliment himself. because you both sound exactly the same… only he cries more tears.

            • You are very perceptive, I think, but it’s not clear which “matt” i’m ghost writing for. I’l assume it’s the CalTech guy but if you noticed, he claims his iPad’s auto correct function doesn’t work. I’m too poor to own an iPad, am much less educated, and I check my grammar and spelling.

              However, it’s possible we may have been separated at birth.

              • pretty sure you’re just the same guy. but he said he is an engineer and has an ipad, and you say you’re an amazing film snob who probably writes ebert’s stuff for him too, cause you’re just so qualified, just like matt the science guy who knows science so well he seeded life in his basement and has an android out in the garage and knows this sci-fi stuff is just balderdash cause he’s already done it, so i gotta go with you two. my bad.

                • It’s funny you mention Ebert because he’s my film critic hero – not because I agree with him every time (he gave Prometheus 4 stars out of 4 and I obviously disagree), but because he’s such a great writer. I wish I could write half as well as Ebert. Matt the CalTech guy hated the movie. I liked it a lot, maybe even loved it when I came out of the theater only because I liked the fact Ridley Scott took the story away from the murderer on a train scenario like in Alien. But after talking it over with a couple of friends, I realized that upon a second viewing I wouldn’t be able to stomach the inadequacies. That happens to me sometimes where I fail to pick up on lazy writing or poor direction, and sometimes the opposite happens where I didn’t appreciate a movie as much as I should have. And that’s the true litmus test for a great movie for me – can it hold up upon repeat viewings and over a long period of time. I wont’ bore you with my list of great movies since it’s subjective to a degree. BUT, it should be recognized that a certain level of appreciation and understanding can be reached if one is critical and experiences enough samples of great movie making. I’m not talking about box office winners, and that’s the point – the masses tend not to seek out and think WHY a movie is great. It can be because of the writing, the acting, the directing, the production, the cinematography, and when all those things come together, then you really have a great movie. You and I disagree – you may enjoy Prometheus again and again; I don’t believe I will. We are anonymous here and our typewritten words all look the same but one has to recognize that the experience and thought processes behind the typed words are not always equal. And the lack of that recognition is the price one must pay when following a website that has “rant” in its title and offers equal footing to each participant.

                  I’m not Matt the CalTech guy. I’m much more stuffy.

                  • oh, excellent. glad to hear you need friends to tell you what to think of a movie stuffy snob movie critic guy. that was a fantastic story.

                    i’m glad so many people feel like giving such amazing back stories on themselves. i feel we have some real character development here. caltech science man with an ipad and movie goer man who checks his grammar. my interest is off the charts.

      • I think maybe you are confused. This is sci fi and all you need to do is accept the premise shown on the screen and watch the story. Prometheus was punished for giving life and fire to mankind. That alone explains the opening scene, in which a ship hovered above, like Zeus looking down on Prometheus. Beyond that there is no proof your interpretations are correct, or your questions are the right ones to ask. You could just as easily interpret it in a way that satisfies your intellectual curiosity. The majority of human DNA does not appear to encode genes and we do not know its purpose. Holes like that in science could account for much of the problem you have with the black substance and its seemingly incongruous effects on both humans and the engineers and other life forms that appear to be bioengineered weapons, which are not unlike the eagle in Prometheus mythology. The entire movie is an symbolic and visually explorational of the dangers of knowledge/science/false gods and the salvation of faith in a benign creator.

        • “Beyond that there is no proof your interpretations are correct, or your questions are the right ones to ask. You could just as easily interpret it in a way that satisfies your intellectual curiosity.”

          Finally, someone makes a comment I can get behind. So many trivial gripes and oversights.

          • I’d agree there about interpretations being personal, but Ridley has made a film that wants to expand on his original 1979 masterpiece by exploring the Space Jockey character instead of the Xeno character (that’s been done to death!) While that can lead to greate ideas, the film still needs decent characters with motives that are believable if we are to suspend disbeleif with Sci-Fi. The film should stand alone but now relies on sequels to mop up the massive plot holes. Personal intelectual ability can lean one along speculative roads to further develop ideas, but not explain why some things were just poorly done

            • I didn’t notice a problem with either the characters or see any plot-holes that required a sequel. Do I want one? Yeah, but certainly don’t require one. I think too many people are using “plot-holes” as a go to for either not understanding something or not wanting to use their imaginations for things that were implied.

              I personally don’t understand why we need to see what happens next, be told what the Engineers were up to or explained what the “goo” actually did or who created us. In fact, when I went in originally I was hoping it was going to be one massive grotesque horror parade with lots of crazy things popping out of people and not ever getting any answers. It’s far more interesting if you aren’t told and horror is scarier if you don’t see the creature.

              • Hey, we are in agreement, we do not need to see what happens next, especially if it carries through on the flawed ideas in this moview. But there obviously will be a next movie. Just like Episode III ended with the rise of Darth Vader, the last of the bridge movies, prequels to Aliens, sequels to Prometheus, will end with, at the very least, an implanted being climbing into a pilot chair, and maybe even showing the eruption of the final xeno form.

                • I think you’re getting caught up in minutiae and failing to enjoy the film on a bigger level. The original Alien was an exploration of the concept of “other” on many levels as it relates to human consciousness, using audio and visual cues to link back to psychoanalysis, e.g., mother and reproductive organs. Prometheus focuses on the concept of faith in a very similar way and the empiricists don’t come out so hot.

          • Like the original poster said: “You could just as easily interpret it in a way that satisfies your intellectual curiosity.”

            What some of us are arguing about is having to settle for the lowest common denominator of intellectual curiosity. I paid for Ridley Scott, not Michael Bay.

            • Sure. You’re just too smart for this movie. Poor Ridley, if only he knew that Matt and Jeff were going to be watching he’d have wised up.

              • It’s not that I’m too smart for this movie. It’s that I prefer not to settle.

                • settle… really? that’s cute. prior to this i thought you and prometheus were going to be going steady. oh well ;[

  17. one more thing;

    so the rock guy who is in it just for the money cant find his way out of the cave or maze with the animal guy, but once the acid gets to his face mask and he gets a face full of black ooze, he ends up right in front of the ship?!?!? REALLY?!?!?!?

    • He’s now a super ape that is bullet proof, breathes argon, and has an incredible knack for navigation. Duh

  18. I got this secondary theme from the movie that people want to kill their parents. The daughter who was in charge wanted her dad to die so she could assume his riches. I think this is why later Dave said, “Doesn’t everyone want their parents to die?” Maybe he was confused by her… and then this theme might be related to the engineers wanting to kill the humans. Not sure, but it seemed like a minute agenda that they just randomly tossed into the movie.

    • Also, Dave seemed to get a kick out of that guy calling him “the closest thing he’ll ever have to a son” with his daughter standing right there. He smirked briefly. They had some kind of strange tension between them, especially after the old man woke up.

  19. I gotta say I loved this movie. Definitely a 3.5 star movie for me. In relation to the opening scene, I believe that was a suicide attempt, not an attempt of creation. The engineer had killed himself after realizing what they had created (in those ships).

  20. I totally agree with Matt`s (guess which) analysis of this movie.

    this medical apparatus is one of 2 things that bug me and haven`t been discussed yet:
    1. at the present surgeons are using very advanced surgery robots to perform most complicated procedures, in the future with androids like David around a grabber machine like device feels pretty awkward

    2. how could this expedition have cost a trillion bucks? it`s a pretty small ship, just a handful of mercs and a bunch of incompetent and therefore cheap scientists.
    if a trillion bucks isn`t much in the future why would Shaw and Holloway need the corporation to raise the money anyway?
    if it is a lot, what could have been so expensive? the grabber machine?

    why send such a lousy welcome comittee anyway? wouldn`t we want to make a good first impression when meeting our creators?

    • “how could this expedition have cost a trillion bucks?”

      If we use the current inflation calculators, which currently limits us from 1980 to 2070 (http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html), $1T 90 years out is around $110 billion dollars today.

      Thus, I suspect that the money went into the ion engines, sensors, etc. Probably most of which, are R&D & fabrication expenditures via Weyland Corp, the US govt (or New World govt), and contract manufacturers. The crew costs zip and for the most part, the mission would have been abetted if they’d spent $1.0005 T, to have an expert crew who knew what they were doing.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x1YuvUQFJ0&feature=youtu.be

      just had to share that :D

      • 3rd Matt, thanks so much for sharing, I just peed myself

  21. What if:
    The Black goo was like that formula from the Swamp Thing ( Not to be confused with the Man-Thing)
    For example, the villain who drank the formula in the Swamp thing was altered based on his personality, he turned into a monster, where has the good guy who had the formula explode onto his body, he turned into a regenerative man-plant thing.

    So the Black goo enhanced the rock guys persona (he didnt drink it, he fell face first into it)since he was yelling and screaming in Shaw’s face and looked as if he needed anger management.
    Unfortunately because of the lame writer, when Shaw’s boyfriend drank the goo, he was changing into something but was killed before we were able to see

  22. Does the suicidal engineer;s DNA give life tothe dinosaurs or was this afterwards

  23. what people seem to forget is that everyone watched the movie with different expectations and premise.
    If you wanted an opulent looking Sci Fi flick you might be satisfied.
    I expected an introduction into the vast universe of Alien, beside the Nostromo or LV 426.
    I expected at least a scene or 2 on Earth to see how mankind developed, I wanted to see the economic war of the corporations and how it affected life on our planet and our solar system. I expected more and better written dialogue and a slower pace instead of a Zombie-Alien gore fest.

    although I wasn`t very happy with Avatar either it did a better job introducing a new Universe to the viewer which was the job of this movie: INTRODUCING US TO THIS UNIVERSE.

    that`s why I`m disappointed.
    and now I rest my case ;)

    • “I expected at least a scene or 2 on Earth to see how mankind developed, I wanted to see the economic war of the corporations and how it affected life on our planet and our solar system. I expected more and better written dialogue”

      I think the young Peter Weyland / 2023 TED conference viral preview was one of the reasons why this film fell flat in the dialogue department.


      The above preview had everything … an up and coming Industry Mogul, a brief snippet of humanity’s advancements, and a promise of great expectations for the decades ahead in terms of humans’ mastering their destinies.

      After seeing the preview, I wanted to quit my job and start a technology company. I was inspired by his bold vision. After seeing ‘Prometheus’, however, I wanted to get a cushy job with the govt because I’ve pretty much given up on SciFi epics and only looked forward to seeing the original ‘Alien’ in a nursing home down the road.

      • so true, why even bother building up all the lore in the viral marketing when you don`t use it in the end…

        • it’s the way it’s going now, they pump all this out online to feed the masses meaning they can cut it out of the film to save costs. The TV show lost was the same, endless clips buried on the net showing little snippets of extra footage. Their aim was to tie all the crap together but it just created more questions. The whole premise of viral clips fails in the end. Just need to think a movie out better and not use LOST writers who are intent on not writing correctly.

          However, my take on it is that Shaw and David flew off to the main planet of the super people as we saw at the end. They crashed onto LV426 and either Shaw or David (head-reattached) was in the big flying seat, wrapped up in the exoskeleton thing. When crashed, goo escaped and the pilot got infected and popped a chest burster. This beast then wandered around, lay a bunch of eggs and probably died. The other one, david or shaw setup a warning beacon which Ripley and the Nostromo picked up years later. Weyland Corp, being pissed that the Prometheus mission failed OR knew it was still going somewhere, if they intercepted Shaw’s final message, was chomping at the bit when Nostromo picked up the beacon and sent them down ignoring Shaw’s warning that this place is only death. Quite criptic and nondescript but essential to maintain link to Alien.

          Cracked it i think :)

          • I also think they will link Prometheus with the first Alien movie at the end of the coming 1-2 (prequel)sequels, but I don`t think it will be Shaw`s ship. Shaw and David are on a truly epic journey now, maybe like Prometheus she will get hurt again and again as she explores mankinds origin further.
            whatever happens, they won`t get away that cheap again^^
            would be just boring if they crash landed again…would be less of an Alien movie and more of an “The Horrorflight of Spaceship 0815″ series…

          • “why even bother building up all the lore in the viral marketing when you don`t use it in the end” and “they pump all this out online to feed the masses meaning they can cut it out of the film to save costs”.

            I concur with the above sentiments, however, my primary issue with the viral preview was that it wasn’t just plain ‘good’, it was great!

            First of all, many current TED speakers, like Ray Kurzweil, have extraordinary visions and can get entire groups of listeners excited about the possibilities of science and engineering. Now, extend this 11-12 years into our own future, TED 2023, a young man, soon to be the world’s wealthiest technocrat, lays down the rules and that’s that man will achieve a level, not too unlike the Gods of antiquity in our universe, with Weyland as its leader.

            Now, tell me, how can one not get excited about ‘Prometheus’, after a preview like that.

  24. on the hole i enjoyed the film , totally not what i expected especially the ending . my interpretation of the story is as follows , the engineer at the beginning released his own DNA on to earth as an experiment to see if intelligent life would evolve . the markers or drawings placed around the earth were the engineers insurance policy . If intelligent life on earth reached a level where it could find its creators , then intelligent life on earth would become a threat by rivaling those that created it , so the markers pointed to a trap .

    • I like this to explain the core plot. concise and imaginative. unlike most rants on here.
      Still, if they wanted to see if intelligent life would evolve you might think they’d want to see their creation. Especially when they actually met the intelligent form, not just primitive cave dwellers, instead of any dialog or which planet are you from, the super dude just killed them all.

      Also, do you think it was earth at the start? The DNA started all life on Earth? Hmm, since their DNA matched Human, we have to assume it wasn’t earth but WAS to create humans. The other life on Earth came about differently.

  25. The Opening Scene – The engineer drank the corrosive material so that his genes would quickly be spread via waterways, and apparently jump-start evolution. This may have been Earth, or another planet – doesn’t really matter. What does matter is that the Engineer sacrificed his own life to do it. The Hovering ship looks like an almond, or a seed for what it’s worth.

    The Engineers may have started life on Earth, or jump started human evolution. If the first is true, then they have been around for billions of years. If the later is true, then is would be an odd coincidence that they have the same DNA as us. Unless or course they are not the creators, but simply another creation.

    The Engineers may represent Angels. Some of the Angels, according to legend/tradition/scripture rebelled and were cast out or left heaven, as they were jealous of God’s newest creation – Man. This may explain the Engineers’ desire to attack Earth.

    Prometheus takes place on LV-223, Alien takes place on LV-426. Different planets (technically moons) and different ships are seen.

    The black goo is some type of evolution booster, used to create new life forms, or used as a bioweapon. There appears to be more than one type, as it does different things to different subjects.

    David infected Holloway, resulting in his body mutating and producing worms. Had he not been killed, he probably would have become a raging monster like Fifield. One or more of these worms was transmitted into Shaw via intercourse, and grew into an embryo. She removed it, thought she killed it, but it continued to grow, and eventually attacked the last Engineer.

    The alien creature that resulted in the attack was similar to the classic alien (xenomorph), but not the same. It was not a precursor to the classic xenomorph, nor was it an evolved version. It was a different creature, as there are different types of birds, fish, etc on Earth I do believe this last scene was unnecessary, though.

    The scientists who were stranded were idiots, but they were also panicking. Panicking people rarely do smart things.

    The Med Pod was designed for male patients because it was Peter Weyland’s personal equipment. It was there for him only, as it was in the escape pod, which was also Vickers and Weyland’s personal quarters.

  26. terrible movie, what a waste of time. not one character development, and when you think something may be up with “david” when he gets one of the cylinders with the black gooze, it falls right apart. i could have farted a better movie.

  27. I think the reason that this thread is still going strong, and will continue, is because there are a lot of smart people that were thinking, “was this movie as bad as I thought it was?” And then they come here and laugh their ass off because clearly this movie had little to offer intellectually. The best part of the movie is hearing what people say on this site.

    Also, Jimmy please stop talking it is awkward to read your comebacks.

    • “I think the reason that this thread is still going strong, and will continue, is because there are a lot of smart people that were thinking”

      really? are you 10? thanks for your contribution mike d. you just blew everyone’s mind wide open.

  28. Ok movie but confusing plot. Poor character development in my opinion. I never cared about any of the characters except the android. In terms of mood. I felt like I just took a spaceship to Scotland. I never felt like I went anywhere. The cool bluish color film tinted fly overs of scottland at the beginning desensitized me to being impressed with the planet they went to. It would be easy for me to think the waterfall was on the same planet they went to instead of on earth. I loved the ghostly holograms of the aliens though. Very mysteriously cool.Charlize Theron I think should have played the survivor lady. They could have gotten another actress to play the Theron character.

  29. I just saw the movie last night. I too was less than impressed with the “science”. I know Hollywood likes to impress but the first scenes aboard the ship with David walking around set me off. Why is the ship so big? Big costs alot of money to get into space. 2089? We don’t even have a shuttle at this point. I would have been happier if they had found an alien ship and flew it there.

    The first Aliens movie had the cramped commercial ship Nostramo. Yes I can get by all the weightless, gravity, and no bothersome acceleration stuff, because we have seen it for years. I just expected more of the gritty “believable” science. Graphics, technology, and scenery are very well done. But we expect that today so that can’t “carry” the film.

    I thought the characters were totally flat. Yes, I know, from the beginning, they are all going to die anyway but at least inject a little more…something. Anything. Aliens 1 had more character development in the two ship’s mechanics than most of the characters in Prometheus. (Here kitty kitty kitty..Is that you Jonesy?) This what what bothered me most about the movie.

    I have read alot of what has been said in this blog about the beginning of the movie and what it means. Some interesting ideas and interpretations. I hope that a future sequel will help us better understand the scene.

    Perhaps the movie was just too long and that too much of it hit the cutting room floor. Maybe there will be more to come in a “Directors Cut” DVD that will help explain things.

    It is just a movie, but along with entertainment, I want to understand what is happening and why. I watched it, and will surely watch again to see what I can drag out of it. I give it 2-3 stars out of 5.

    Alien rates 4 stars because I was in the front seat of a theatre and was scared sh*tless when the first alien came out. Aliens (the second movie) rates 4 stars for the plot, science, and suspense. The rest were okay to help “round out” the genre but nothing beat the first two movies in the series.

    Scott needs to do a better job next time.