EatSleepLiveFilm.com Back to LV-223: Revisiting Prometheus

Back to LV-223: Revisiting Prometheus

June 11, 2012 By Mike Williams In Features

*This article is (obviously) spoiler heavy*

Just uttering the word Prometheus will send some into an uncontrollable rant about how Ridley Scott has lost his touch, slapped us all in the face and desecrated the Alien franchise (though to be fair, Fincher and Jeunet did a fine job of that years ago). There will be those who thoroughly enjoyed the movie and still hold Sir Ridley – as well as writer Damon Lindelof – in high regard. Finally, you’ll get the ‘meh’ crowd, who neither hated with a passion, nor found it hugely engrossing.

It’s the first film to divide audiences to such an extreme since last summer’s Tree of Life, but fortunately I’ve not heard of any walkouts in this instance. It’s also really split the ESLF staff, too, with a mixture of love, hate and ‘meh’ emanating from all corners.

Prometheus has landed

After my first viewing at the Friday 00.01 showing, I fell into the hugely disappointed, what has Ridley – but mainly writer Lindelof – done?! crowd. After such a strong and plentiful marketing campaign, building up to what had the potential to knock The Dark Knight Rises off the summit off my Film of the Year list. My review can be found here, if you’d like a little more clarity and detail on my thoughts.

However, to summarise, my initial reactions were:

Aesthetically, the film is beautiful, with great concept art
It includes some intriguing references to the world of Alien
It’s a rather ambiguous science fiction that leaves more unanswered than answered
Mostly weak performances, aside from the wonderful Michael Fassbender
It has a weak script that feels muddled and unstructured

Overall, I still really liked the film rather than actually loved it, and whilst I wasn’t blown away, I did have the urge to re-watch it as soon as possible. So, five days later I confidently opted for an afternoon screening.

Prometheus has landed… Again

Upon exiting this time, I immediately felt more content and, dare I say it, liked it even more, for a number of reasons:

Having reflected on an initial experience, seeing it without the built-up hype helps
Having delved into many an online discussion board (mainly IMDb) things become a lot clearer
Many discrepancies and possible plot holes appear justified or more logical in choice
Characters (such as Theron’s Vickers and Elba’s Janek) feel more developed and valid
Fassbender’s role as David feels even more accomplished and intriguing
It works really well as a pre-prequel that never intends to answer, but instead poses more questions
First and foremost, this is a science fiction film about exploration, and shouldn’t be mistaken for horror or action

So, those were my instant thoughts the second time around. And just remember people: these are merely my opinions mixed with some research and other views on the matter. So if you disagree, interpret them differently, or know some answers I don’t, please feel free to pop them in the comments below. I am only addressing some problems I/people have/had with Prometheus.

I found some plot discrepancies made more sense, as you can anticipate and take note of some of the more subtle/unclear things with the power of hindsight, and having read some convincing reasoning behind them. Below are burning questions I had and, as you’ll see, managed to logically theorise and answer many, but also leave a few very much unsolved:

What did the opening scene signify?

It visualised part of the story of the God Prometheus and depicted him creating life on (presumably) Earth. He sacrifices himself as his DNA dissolves into the waterfall, thus starting the beginning of life. More info on this here.

Why did the Engineers allow mankind to discover their location by leaving them a series of ancient planetary drawings?

Leading on from the prior bullet point, because the human race appears to have been created in defiance by a sole, renegade Engineer, the idea that humanity are intended to discover their makers and find a way to preserve themselves rather than suffer annihilation (as we learn Earth is (supposedly) the destination for the Engineer ships full of their bio-weapon cargo) therefore explains their purpose. So yes, in a way it was ‘an invitation’, as cited by Shaw. These pointers are also why their DNA is a match to that of humans and explanation why the cave drawings lead scientists to LV-223; for self preservation.

What were David’s motives?

Many deemed him ‘evil’, but my initial theory was the android is merely inquisitive and curious by his very nature. A willingness to learn and discover could explain why he spikes Holloway’s drink with black goo, as he lacks the moral ethics and emotional dexterity to realise what he does is fundamentally wrong. However, the other, more probable theory is that he is simply following orders from Peter Weyland: spiking the drink; taking the alien canister; communicating with the Engineer, because of instruction.

What were Peter Weyland’s motives?

His motives seemed to be that in his final days he was put into stasis to be woken for this very occasion, as he wanted to a) receive answers to why humanity exists, and b) discover the secret for immortality. One other theory I read is that Weyland is Prometheus, but hold that thought..

How was Shaw not sedated and allowed to perform a self-caesarean?

Still unclear in my mind how she was sedated by David, yet somehow wasn’t when the two crew members came to prep her for hypersleep. The other thing: where was David during the moment she escaped? The second time around it was clear that he had left the lab, and indeed the area of the ship, in order to greet Weyland when he came out of hypersleep. However, as Shaw has incapacitated the two crew, she is allowed to wander into Vickers’ private quarters and perform a caesarean without interference. How the fallen crew didn’t track her down remains a mystery. Perhaps they simply didn’t know where she’d gone, and maybe only she and David knew about her pregnancy.

Why is Shaw’s escape and actions pardoned when she stumbles into Weyland’s room?

To follow on from above, she stumbles into the room where Weyland is being treated and prepped to ‘meet’ the Engineer. David is there too, but says nothing about Shaw’s unexpected appearance. This implies to me that in fact David is the only one who knows about her pregnancy, as no one else seems worried or bothers to ask what has happened concerning her bloodied torso. Adhering to the idea that Weyland is Prometheus, to have Shaw ‘give birth’ was perhaps the actual intention, thus it was not dwelled upon.

Was Vickers an android?

She appears to be offended when Janek asks her, and seeing as she invites him to her private quarters, only the pair of them would know for sure. It’s worth assuming she is human, succumbing to the urge to engage with Janek. Were she not human, he doesn’t mention so at any point or express regret. When Vickers burns Holloway though, she barely hesitates, hinting at a possible lack of human emotion, implying she has none and might indeed be an android, or simply a cold-hearted bitch. Either way, it leaves the possibility of her artificiality open, especially with the revelation she’s Weyland’s daughter.

What did David say to the Engineer?

Another one that still remains unclear, but the fact that the Engineer strokes his head says something in itself. Combine this with the smile David offers, and it seems the pair have a mutual, pleasant exchange before all hell breaks loose and he literally loses his head.

What were the intentions of the Engineer?

As touched upon in the first points, the Engineers appeared to be heading to Earth to wipe out humanity with their bio-weaponry and start a fresh. We see a hologram that clearly depicts a planet very similar to Earth, and the fact David states this is their intention pretty much cements that one. But then again, if you are a sceptic, you’ll surely question David’s intent and truthfulness.

How did Shaw not starve to death after blasting off in search of Engineers?

A point some have found implausible. How can she leave LV-223 in search of the Engineers, for who knows how long, with no food or water? It was only on the second watch that I noticed her grabbing supplies as she boarded Vickers’ escape pod, which – as stated in the film – had a two year stock of food and drink on board.

What happened in regards to the crashed ship and Engineer (‘Space Jockey’) we see in Alien?

Simply, the crashed Engineer ship that the Nostromo crew in Alien discover is on a planet called LV-426. Prometheus is set on LV-223. So completely different parts of the solar system, let alone planet. The confusion seems to be that the set up on LV-223 and conclusion to Prometheus is similar to how Alien begins, but on closer inspection, is indirectly related.

Rarely do I feel inclined to visit a film twice at the cinema. It’s only happened one other time and that was due to a (free) coincidence for Rise of the Planet of the Apes last August. Prometheus intrigued me so much that it demanded a re-watch as well as a rethink. Yes, it might be in the same universe as Alien, but when you think about it, it is actually a totally different kind of film. It wasn’t as isolated and claustrophobic as Alien, nor was it as scary or really part of the horror genre. Prometheus is a film about characters that seek answers; answers to the biggest question mankind could pose: why are we here?

Granted, it doesn’t have a narrative structure in a traditional sense, that 95% of great films have. But what it did have were a lose string of connected events that take place, and somehow seem more justified and resolute upon a repeat watch.

I’m not usually one to approve of prior ‘recommended reading’ to understand and appreciate a film more, but the rich, mythological beast that is Prometheus is something I’d suggest looking into before a first or second watch. Knowledge of Weyland Industries and the Alien series is, again, not essential, but one I would actually advise getting to grips with simply for the added engagement and enjoyment you can gain here.

Prometheus, at no point, attempts to or claims to clarify things. Like the crew, the audience are there on an exploratory mission into the unknown, asking the questions that no one knows the answers to. Cynics will pinpoint it as a mere cash cow; an excuse to hone in yet again on the Alien franchise and leave opportunity for a further few films that can lead up to Alien. To me, it feels more like Scott opening up a new world to explore and developing a new franchise - but in a good way.

Two cinema viewings (one in 3D; the other in 2D – I would recommend the latter) has told me it was right to revisit. Right to delve a little deeper. Right not to judge Scott so quickly for making a ‘dud’. Every now and then a film comes along that generates an enormous amount of discussion and opinion (see Kill List from last year and 2001’s Donnie Darko as well), which instantly says to me that it’s not a film to be dismissed, but instead embraced as a thought provoking, interesting and far more intelligent film than it has been given initial credit for.

Final thought

Certain plot coherencies aside, I will leave you with this…

Far too often audiences are left dissatisfied with the spoon-feeding nature of some movies. So why then is it that when we’re left to speculate and think a little for ourselves, that that too is seen as a bad thing?

James McDonald

Probably the best article I’ve read all year. Bravo. Certainly ironed a few things out in my mind and a second watch is certainly on the cards. I been raging for days over its shitness.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Thanks for the compliment, James! See, one of the aspects about it I like is all the discussion and theory regarding its meaning, etc. Some will say that doesn’t mean it’s a good film or healthy debate, but I really enjoyed KILL LIST and the ideas discussed after that. I believe it adds more depth. Hopefully after your second viewing, it will all feel a bit better, clearer and more likeable =D
Chris Ward

I felt neither disappointment or hatred towards the film, as it gave me enough of the Alien universe to satisfy what I was after and offered up new possibilities. I didn’t want a totally spoon-fed plot Alien prequel and I didn’t get one. It’s obvious there’ll be more before we get to the beginnings of Alien and even though the film did have its flaws it entertained me and left we wanting to discover more.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Yes, Chris, I agree with you. I am actually looking forward to what’s next to come, even if some have merely branded it a cheap, lazy cash cow!
http://www.facebook.com/OTC.Chris Christopher Bricklemyer

Great article. I was and still am in the liked it a lot (not sure if I love it) category. However, I have been baffled as to why the points you discuss here were missed by so many people.

It’s my understanding that LV-426 and LV-223 are moons of the same planet. I figured Shaw set the ship down on the nearest moon, which would either be LV-426 or the third (I think) unnamed moon.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Cheers, Chris. I think I would go under the ‘really liked it’ heading, but could grow to love it I believe.
  
  I’d read somewhere that the planets were no where near one another and in different systems.. but I guess there’s still things you read that aren’t fact. Thanks for bringing the planet proximity theory to light, though. It would indeed make sense if it were the nearest moon, rather than them travelling into deep space from LV-223.
  - http://www.facebook.com/OTC.Chris Christopher Bricklemyer
    
    Yeah, until the movie shows it, it’s all just “expanded universe.” When I watch it again, I’ll pay closer attention to what they say, like if the star system Zeta Reticuli is mentioned. (I just watched Alien again last night.)
http://www.facebook.com/OTC.Chris Christopher Bricklemyer

I saw the maps from the Engineers more as a “this is where we come from,” not a “come and find us when you are ready.” After all, you have to figure that the people that painted the Engineers did so after they were shown. I can’t imagine they posed for the paintings and reliefs.

But, that begs the question, what were the Engineers doing on Earth interacting with people back then, and at all those different times in history? I think they were gauging how far along we were and were predicting when they would need to return. After all, the crew of the Engineer ship dies 2000 years ago, which would have been somewhere roughly between 0 A.D. and 100 A.D. Well before the technology would be developed to become a credible threat to ourselves or the Engineers. And, maybe that’s the reason we were going to be wiped out back then, for all we know, we are a prototype life form – one that failed to satisfy the expectations of our creators.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Nice theory. Some good points I’d not considered,but I too thought that the human race simply was a test and needed wiping out as we didn’t meet requirements (after all, we kill each other, cause famine, war, hatred, etc), what really is to like?
  
  Also, 2000 years ago, didn’t Jesus die around then? There’s a lot of talk about the religious aspects and comparisons, even a suggestion that Jesus himself was an Engineer..
  
  I believe that because the Engineer sacrifices himself to create mankind, the drawings discovered through time are actually a form of a subconscious message somehow communicated through the DNA of the Engineer in civilisations through history. Left there to allow humanity (when technology was advanced enough) to seek out the Engineers that are headed for Earth to wipe out the inhabitants, thus stopping them from doing so.
http://www.filmrant.co.uk/ Noel Mellor

Nice one Mike. I’ve been reading and talking about this film with others at great length and I’d say this is perhaps the best (and closest to my own) set of theories and explainations I have come across so far.

However, while I do agree that the fact Prometheus has us all talking is a good thing, I personally remain firmly in the ‘disappointed’ camp. I too watched the film twice ahead of our review for 35mm Heroes and am most definitely of the mind that while some of the plot holes can be ironed out on a rewatch, the film is simply not as well structured as it should be.

My other major gripe is the continued issue around its status as a prequel/non-prequel and how no-one involved seemed to have the balls to define it as one or the other. While Fox has been busy selling the movie as the former (and believe me they will continue to do so when the DVD/Blu-ray release comes around), Scott has been busy emphasising that it is in fact the latter – despite peppering it with a title sequence and heavy use of Alien iconography that would suggest otherwise.

It would have been easy to make this film a direct precursor to the 1979 original – and would have been equally easy to truly make it a standalone piece. In fact, when you take out the story about a doomed millionaire’s space mission to find ‘God’, its not hard to see where the franchise-related stuff has been grafted loosely on top.

Unfortunately, it’s this lack of commitment to either – plus a messy script that raises only mildly interesting questions – that I cannot seem to forgive at this time.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Cheers, Noel, glad you agree with a lot of my explanation/theories, etc.
  
  I guess multiple views and reading won’t change everyone’s opinion on the film, and was surprised how much I enjoyed the second cinema visit actually, as I barely do that, or see the need to.
  
  To me, it is a prequel because it is set in the same universe and contains a lot of themes, imagery, iconography and aesthetic of the Alien franchise. I’m not sure why no one is confirming the connection; like ambiguity is the best answer somehow. For either Scott or Lindelof to deny, or at least not acknowledge it as some form of a prequel makes them look a bit daft, unless they’re intentionally playing mind games because of the obviousness.
  
  I agree, I wish Scott had just admitted it is a precursor to Alien, albeit it not a direct prequel as it doesn’t begin where Prometheus ends.
  
  It would be interesting to hear if it does grow on you at all on repeat viewings, but you do seem too disappointed for it to do so.
http://www.facebook.com/chriswingking Christopher King

Well done! I’m so glad to read comments from someone who’s actually thought about the film. There is intelligent life out there after all.
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Haha, thank you, Christopher!
Steve Whittenbury

Thanks for this Mike. I saw the film in 3D and may still revisit in 2D to compare – having seen some dodgy use of this presentation format, and leaving aside my inherent dislike for it, I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the 3D.

That’s the easy part – what did I think of the film itself though? Like you, on walking out at the end, my initial reaction was “is that the best you could do?” when thinking about the offering I had just seen. I did as many others have: reflected, read and revised my opinions, thus leading me to this reply.

Love your analysis, loads of things cleared up, although I still have some things to say and some gripes (I like griping) so if I may:

1) Loved the look, feel, mood and atmosphere – classic sci-fi
2) We have a chestburster scene for the 21st Century in Shaw’s “caesarean” – made me squirm

Typical praise sandwich now, as I start with the gripes:

3) Plot leaps were a problem for me – the most jarring was how Janek makes the leap from “WTF” to “WMDs” just before it all really kicks off at the end. The lack of characterisation in many of the crew only made the logic of the story more difficult to follow too – I was disappointed with the presentation of the crew (something along the lines of “they’re only cannon-fodder so there’s no point in getting to know them”) but that was what made Alien so shocking and impactful in 1979, losing people you actually cared about
4) The plot links to Alien and the “is it a prequel or not?” debate was a little disingenuous of the writers as introduing things like the space croissant, the space jockey’s control chair and a room full of “eggs” were obviously meant to make us connect this to Alien but were not the same things after all – I know it’s their prerogative to mess with the audience, but I felt doing so was a little childish and unnecessary
5) And while we’re on that, making the final scene the “birth” of the Engineer’s “son” made me think of the final scene in Alien Vs Predator, where the “predalien” is born – just too schlocky and pulpy for a film with such high ideals (let alone due to the association with AVP)
6) Similarly, I saw the Vickers/Weyland “Daddy issues” coming some time before and it just seemed pointless and cheesy

OK – got that out of my system. How do we conclude all this

7) Final point – I obviously love this movie, even though I don’t know it yet, as I can’t stop thinking about it and need to talk about it! Great point about having a film that creates such debate and makes us think for a change – I think I just wanted to scratch my head a little less and feel my heart beeting in my chest a little more

Perhaps the inevitable follow-up to Prometheus (Promethei? Prometheum? Are we are going to decline this noun correctly?) will take some of the valid fan comments on board but I am obviously keen to know how the story ends. Shaw and David tracking down more engineers? The use of the “black goo” as a bio-weapon somehow? How the space croissant got onto LV-426 and how it’s pilot died via chestburster? This last one seems frankly more unlikely now as the writers do not seem as keen on resolution as they are on obfuscation in the name of art – perhaps we will never know?
- http://twitter.com/littlestpicshow Mike P Williams
  
  Cheers, Steve.
  
  I’d say it’s worth checking out in 2D, mainly because I am not a lover of the third dimension to be honest.
  
  I agree,I didn’t like the lack of depth of the crew because yes, it was the shock of losing characters we got to know in Alien, whereas here we’re introduced to the core members (the film’s stars), but there are several other fringe staff that merely appear just to get killed. I love the claustrophobia of Alien with a mere six characters or so on the entire ship.
  
  True, there is so much to discuss we could do so all day! Seems the ideas Scott and Lindelof had were to generate such ambiguity with a lot becoming clear upon reading the story/myth of Prometheus as well as seeing what theories other people come up with online! =D