ALIEN / PROMETHEUS / COVENANT / ROMULUS - SPOILERS INBOUND!!

Fuck. Maybe I should just wait for a directors' cut.

ah shit. so I'll have to watch the lesser version first. fuck that.

you think it can't possibly get worse, then it does.

I was gonna post this with my last post about the 12a/pg-13 certificate but now it's pretty much definite I'll post here -

I am disappoint.

Cha-ching

what a shame.

  On 4/11/2012 at 3:57 PM, mcbpete said:

http://www.empireonl...y.asp?NID=33510

  Quote

" Essentially, it's kinda R."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I KNEW IT

ARTISTIC INTEGRITY

how about having the 3D version of films rated 12 and the 2D version rated 15? or at least offer that cut to independent cinemas... yes, do that.

  Quote

I'm not an idiot, but I'll do everything I can to get the most aggressive film I can.

  On 4/12/2012 at 5:27 PM, phling said:

  Quote

I'm not an idiot, but I'll do everything I can to get the most aggressive film I can.

 

hi res picture of the ship via IGN:

http://www.prometheusforum.net/discussion/544

Pics of the Prometheus interior, so you can all sperg about it looking wrong and too clean.

Fireproof windscreen? Why is that a headline design feature?

*omg spoilz plot*

Yeah, those captions are dumb. "Intergalactic communication antennae", I am pretty sure they are still in the Milky Way.

The only people I can see being impressed by that annotated spaceship image are pre-teenage kids (man I can see this post getting flagged by the company firewall)

I found the first poster for the spaceship interesting, at least for providing a clear shot of the design, but putting all these indicators on it is kind of juvenile.

I can't tell where Prometheus is going any more. It's largely unnecessary in plot-terms, but the visuals look worth paying for a cinema ticket. But then if any violence and horror is toned-down I'll feel like I've been cheating into a darker Avatar or something. I probably won't watch it in 3D either because I'm mostly against that shit, so maybe I should just pirate it and buy the blu-ray.

Gah, I won't decide if I'm going to see it in the cinema until it's out. It's still interesting, but the market-friendly rating has totally blown the wind out of my sails.

i don't really understand that "being against 3D movies" sentiment, is that an opposition to the idea of 3d movies or just the current execution ? i'm actually looking forward to seeing it in the cinema in 3d (last time i went to the movies was in 2001 to see lotr, lol).

  On 4/13/2012 at 1:03 PM, eugene said:

i don't really understand that "being against 3D movies"

Over priced, poorly projected almost everwhere (it requires brighter (and thus more expensive which most cinemas don't want to shell out for) bulbs to get the same quality exposure as a 2D film) and for some people (myself included) the 3d effect doesn't actually work at all.

I'm fine with films being made in 3D like Avatar and Prometheus(?). But I'm wholly against converting a standard film into 3D and using the cheesy things-popping-out tricks. It doesn't add anything to the film and is only there to trap kids during holidays and get increased revenue.

The 3D aspect of Avatar was necessary to the film to some degree. It would have been exactly the same film in normal-D, but the immersive elements helped to create a believably fantastic alien planet. It made the aliens more alien.

Currently, I'm not sure whether the 3D elements in Prometheus will really add that sort of element to the experience or whether it's just going to be a the-spherical-representation-of-the-galaxy-is-sticking-slightly-out-of-the-screen sort of thing.

Also, Avatar was visually dark as fuck... and I'm short-sighted (with contact-lenses) so my eyes get pretty tired during a 2hr+ film and I can't maintain that sort of focus. During the more hectic scenes in Avatar the 3D wasn't working for me any more and it was just blurry.

Prometheus is definitely being filmed with proper 3D cameras. The first and last 3D movie I saw was Avatar and Promethus will probably be my second. I am interested in seeing how such a visual director as Scott does with it, don't think it's going to be as big a storytelling point as it was in Avatar.

  On 4/13/2012 at 1:08 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 4/13/2012 at 1:03 PM, eugene said:

i don't really understand that "being against 3D movies"

Over priced, poorly projected almost everwhere (it requires brighter (and thus more expensive which most cinemas don't want to shell out for) bulbs to get the same quality exposure as a 2D film) and for some people (myself included) the 3d effect doesn't actually work at all.

On top of that, it can give you headaches. Especially if you already wear glasses.

Part 2 of that video I posted earlier this week about cuts for marketing/distribution reasons -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOOJl5lWNfM

Despite having the possibility of sucking and failing to appease what must surely be a 95% adult audience (seriously, what the fuck are they doing trying to grab a younger audience?), maybe the cast and visuals will be enough to still make this a decent addition to the franchise. Better than 4, as good as 3, but with elements of 1 and 2? I'd probably settle for that.