Ridley Scotts "Prometheus" (2012)


Recommended Posts

I liked the movie, but the story was a bit different than some of you are saying...

Humans were created by mistake.

At the begging of the movie as the aliens are leaving earth one guy stays and he drinks a potion that destroys his body, but as he falls in the water a single string of DNA survives. Than the movie takes us to the evolution process starting with the creation of the single cell organisms.

That is why at the end of the movie the "Engineer" looks down on them as inferior and tryes to kill them with no attempt to comunicate.

So one way yo look at the whole story is that we were created by an accident by a much supperior race.

The doctor proceeds at then end to look for the meaning of life and to see if she can find out who is the ultimate creator, and what gives these engineers the right to create and destroy life.

Very poetic stance.

Prometheus is officially a failure people. What a shame. It is such a beautiful and great film. I guess people did not understand it.

https://www.google.c...iw=1361&bih=981

Just one more prove that majority people like brainless cheesy flicks.

Give them Reality LIfe Show/Movie and it will be a best **** on earth

Post revoked due to previous spoiler tags

Double edit.. The film has recieved comparisons to AVP but as bad as the flaws were in this film, to compare to AVP is just wrong.

Sure, it doesnt make sense that archelogists at the start of the film, meticulously map every move they make to forget this the moment they travel 2 and a bit years to an alien planet.. Then lets put aside the pure lack of obvious plot points in the film you still end up asking more questions than the film answer, which was about the Space Jockey.

LV224 vs LV246 and yes I realise its set in the same universe as Alien but does that mean a parallet universe as well.

During the end the space jockey dies in the space pod not in the gun where the Alien film first discoveres the space jockey.

For a film thats a different universe there sare still a heck of a lot of references. Even taking away Alien and the TV edits that plague the Uk a lot still has to be desired.

I mean you travel 2 and a bit years to an alient planet, youre trapped, see something swiming around in goo and THEN you think its friendly. please.. thats just a step too far.

Take away the Alien reference, take away Ridley scott and ask youselves without the hype was the film really that good? Did you enjoy it as much as other block busters such as the Avengers?

Prometheus is officially a failure people. What a shame. It is such a beautiful and great film. I guess people did not understand it.

https://www.google.c...iw=1361&bih=981

I'm not sure I'd agree. I mean, I don't know how they officially decide whether or not a movie is a success or failure, but I'd say it was a success simply because they've made more than they spent.

According to THR, Prometheus cost was between $120-130 million, and so far, according to Box Office Mojo, it has already made $161.3 million (worldwide) and it has only been out a week.

The way I view a film's box office success is whether or not it broke even or did better. Prometheus has already done better and will continue to do so.

I liked the movie, but the story was a bit different than some of you are saying...

Humans were created by mistake.

At the begging of the movie as the aliens are leaving earth one guy stays and he drinks a potion that destroys his body, but as he falls in the water a single string of DNA survives. Than the movie takes us to the evolution process starting with the creation of the single cell organisms.

That is why at the end of the movie the "Engineer" looks down on them as inferior and tryes to kill them with no attempt to comunicate.

So one way yo look at the whole story is that we were created by an accident by a much supperior race.

The doctor proceeds at then end to look for the meaning of life and to see if she can find out who is the ultimate creator, and what gives these engineers the right to create and destroy life.

I don't agree on the DNA strand theory

The DNA was infected by the black stuff and it was broken down. It was to show then all his cells in the Engineer's body was disentergrating very quickly. There was no surviving DNA, it was all infected and broken up. Also, it's a reference/symbolism to the Xenomorph/Alien of how fast they infect and destroy things.

As for the Engineer ..

I'm thinking the reason was to test the new bio-weapon. There's a backstory that hasn't been told, that's for sure. But why is the 'mothership' leaving him be? I'm thinking he is some sort of scientist, just trying the new weapon on an unknown planet, so the only person he can hurt is himself.

Prometheus is officially a failure people. What a shame. It is such a beautiful and great film. I guess people did not understand it.

https://www.google.c...iw=1361&bih=981

just because you link a search term doesn't mean its a failure :/

That beginning is one thing I was not able to understand. Why did that dude drink that stuff if he knew it would kill him? Why did he stay behind?

That's why I think the "engineers" are more like "pollinators"

One of the theories i read on IMDB about the first engineer :

From what i could read on the IMDB site on the FAQ section of Prometheus, there is one theory that suggest the lonely engineer basically stole the technology of "creation" from the others and made life on planet earth and now the engineers decided they should wipe us out since it was a mistake to begin with ( thus the name of the movie Prometheus - the god who stole fire so he could give it to humans ) Seems to work because of the ritualistic manner in which he did it , he could have did it without sacrificing himself if it was actually a test to begin with  

Those theories of it being a mistake just don't pan out with the pictures drawn through out time. They apparently visited earth multiple times. We did something 2000 years ago that ****ed them off, or made them realize that we were a "mistake" after all. But at the beginning, they were visiting and sharing information... enough info as for tribes to draw the star cluster accurately enough.

Those theories of it being a mistake just don't pan out with the pictures drawn through out time. They apparently visited earth multiple times. We did something 2000 years ago that ****ed them off, or made them realize that we were a "mistake" after all. But at the beginning, they were visiting and sharing information... enough info as for tribes to draw the star cluster accurately enough.

I think it's more of a 'we are from this place' then telling humans to travel there. So did anyone read my Time Travel theory? lol.

someone earlier bought up the plot point about the murial in the tomb, again another part that almost just seems chucked in to create more questions than answers.

Anyone feel that the film was announced and marketed to tell the story of the space jockey but just ended up with more questions being asked and an almost Mass Effect wtf ending?

someone earlier bought up the plot point about the murial in the tomb, again another part that almost just seems chucked in to create more questions than answers.

Anyone feel that the film was announced and marketed to tell the story of the space jockey but just ended up with more questions being asked and an almost Mass Effect wtf ending?

as long as there is a sequel explaining some things then I am quite happy with having questions go unanswered.

I watched this over the weekend and came out confused and rather unimpressed mainly because of the many gaps in the plot.

I don't know much about the Alien series canon but I thought it didn't matter much.

These are the things that had me scratching my head,

- The first engineer who "sacrifices" himself near the waterfall. What was the point and on which planet did it happen? I've read some theories here about early days of earth but I am not convinced. :/

- What was David'd motivation for infecting Holloway? David's dialogues after he meets Shaw after her surgery appeared that he banked on him impregnating Shaw but how did he "know" what the black liquid does to even infect him in the first place?

- The opening engineer dies within seconds/minutes of consuming the liquid whereas Holloway apparently survives a full night or at least a few good hours. Was it because of the quantity? If so, how the heck did he transfer to Shaw when he was not infected "fast enough"?

- Why did the "surviving" geologist Fifield came back and attack the crew?

- What happened to Milburn the biologist? If he died, what happened to the alien that must have came out of him? (similar to how the last engineer dies)

- and to talk of Milburn (and Holloway), I always get a chuckle out of these stereotypical movie characters that travel to distant-unknown-scary places and then throw all caution to the wind. e.g. when Milburn encounters the snake like creature or Holloway insists "I want to go out NAAW" when the Captain warns him about only 5hours of daylight! :D

- Why did the black liquid start oozing out only after the crew visited the place?

- Why was the last engineer in cryo sleep? Why/how did only one survived with some more visibly perfect units in the same chamber (indicating more like him)?

Just a few questions and I'm sure they have already been answered.

1. In the beginning, why did that engineer drink the aliens?

2. Why did the robot poison the doctor? - wife said so he can create an engineer for his father figure.

3. Was the doctor going to explode?

4. The alien that came out of the girl, was it just evolving like the Darwin theory? Because I thought the aliens were created by the spider looking aliens, in this movie they are snakelike, so I'm assuming they are evolving.

I'm seriously starting to think this movie is just flew over a lot of people's heads. No insult, honestly, but many questions are answered in the movie (subtly, but the answers are there) or it's evident that will be answered in the sequel.

I'm seriously starting to think this movie is just flew over a lot of people's heads. No insult, honestly, but many questions are answered in the movie (subtly, but the answers are there) or it's evident that will be answered in the sequel.

I think it went over my head for sure because the more I think of the way things happened in Prometheus, the more I think it was a dumb movie. :D :/

I think it went over my head for sure because the more I think of the way things happened in Prometheus, the more I think it was a dumb movie. :D :/

What exactly is it that you don't understand?

Reading a lot of peoples thoughts, and reviews, not just on this site, makes me think that too many people are STILL thinking this is an Alien prequel and that's what's causing a lot of problems.

What exactly is it that you don't understand?

Reading a lot of peoples thoughts, and reviews, not just on this site, makes me think that too many people are STILL thinking this is an Alien prequel and that's what's causing a lot of problems.

I haven't even seen this first Alien and I am under the impression that this is not a prequel.

My questions/thoughts are in this post (couple of them a bit sily but still valid :blush: )

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/764988-ridley-scotts-prometheus-2012/page__view__findpost__p__594940693

Reading a lot of peoples thoughts, and reviews, not just on this site, makes me think that too many people are STILL thinking this is an Alien prequel and that's what's causing a lot of problems.

Speaking as someone who liked it, I still found it staggeringly, offensively moronic at times. Example,

Shaw whacks two crew, has herself eviscerated, staggers around covered in blood, coming upon Weyland and other crew yet no-one is the least bit concerned by her appearance. At least one of the people she whacked enters the room expressing no interest whatsoever in Shaw. Even David, who we explicity know is aware of her... baby... expresses no interest as to where the, you know, alien is.

Q: The first engineer who "sacrifices" himself near the waterfall. What was the point and on which planet did it happen? I've read some theories here about early days of earth but I am not convinced.

A: It was earth. The entire premise of the movie is to find out where humans came from. Earth was emphatically implied. The engineer sacrificed himself to start the process of evolution. His DNA seeded all life (outside of plants) on earth.

Q: What was David'd motivation for infecting Holloway? David's dialogues after he meets Shaw after her surgery appeared that he banked on him impregnating Shaw but how did he "know" what the black liquid does to even infect him in the first place?

A: Weyland asked him to try harder at finding a solution to his mortality. Holloway was a guinea pig.

Q: The opening engineer dies within seconds/minutes of consuming the liquid whereas Holloway apparently survives a full night or at least a few good hours. Was it because of the quantity? If so, how the heck did he transfer to Shaw when he was not infected "fast enough"?

A: Do we know it was the same liquid? And even if it was, the engineer is not human, so his body verses a human body may react differently.

Q: Why did the "surviving" geologist Fifield come back and attack the crew?

A: He had been sprayed with in the face with some kind of liquid. Who knows what that did to his brain.

Q: What happened to Milburn the biologist? If he died, what happened to the alien that must have came out of him? (similar to how the last engineer dies)

A: Don't know, we don't necessarily know an alien came out of him. We saw his corpse when the team returned to get him. Not everything has to have a 100% definitive answer, especially if there's a sequel lined up.

Q: Why did the black liquid start oozing out only after the crew visited the place?

A: David touched one of them. If they are connected in some way we don't necessarily understand, it could have activated one of them.

Q: Why was the last engineer in cryo sleep? Why/how did only one survived with some more visibly perfect units in the same chamber (indicating more like him)?

A: We don't know. Again, either saving it for the sequel or leaving that answer up to you to decide. Maybe he was the first in the cryo before an outbreak killed the rest. We just don't know.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!