In keeping with my goals for this blog, this review will take a more analytical approach than my usual reviews. It contains no spoilers, and I intentionally posted it with only the teaser trailer, since the longer trailers give too much away. However, I’ll say right off the bat that I highly recommend seeing this movie.
The Alien
franchise is known as one of the most significant science fiction series, and
is arguably the best-known example of a sci-fi/horror crossover. A prequel to
the first film was at least dreamed up in 2000, but it's taken a dozen years to
actually get made, this time under the direction of Ridley Scott.
Having
not touched an Alien-related project since 1979, Scott's approach was always
different from those who took on the later films. James Cameron's Aliens took
its premise, imagery, and characters from the first film, but was essentially a
sci-fi/action film with significant horror elements. I’ll give credit to
Cameron for significantly expanding the universe, however I personally didn’t enjoy
it or any of the other sequels as much as the 1979 original. It was Alien which
to me was the most inspiring, fearsome, and (despite its subject matter)
beautiful film of the series.
Other than Alien, Blade Runner, and
Gladiator, I’m not particularly familiar with Scott’s work. Out of his recent
films I only saw Robin Hood, with which I was a bit disappointed. It didn’t
bother me too much that the story didn’t go according to most retellings of the
Robin Hood legend, and visually it was an excellent film. The characters and
storytelling, though, were not clear or well developed enough to regard it a
really good film. Still, from what I have seen I regard Ridley Scott as a
highly competent, artistic, and original filmmaker.
To give a fair review, I should state a
few facts about my moviegoing experience. First, I had already been excited to
see Prometheus due to my love for the original ’79 film.
Second, it was a midnight premiere
showing. I haven’t been to many of those, so it there was an element of novelty.
Third, I saw it in IMAX 3D. I actually
didn’t have a choice about that. It was the only theatre in my area that was
showing it. I consider 3D to be
rather gimmicky, and for me it doesn’t add enough to most films to really
justify the extra cost. However, the amount of effort the Scott put into the
visuals of Prometheus was aided somewhat by the technology. And, IMAX is just a
superior cinematic experience in general.
The visual production values of Prometheus were extremely high, and as
is consistent with Scott’s style, none of it is pure eye-candy. Scott is an
artist – beauty, to him, is meaningful, as is ugliness. These concepts are
constants in his style, forming a remarkable visual dynamic in a sort of
mythical vision of a film.
The level of audience immersion was also high. Scott cares about the
details, but not in and of themselves: his aim is to tell a story, so he must
make his setting seem real. The audience is able to “settle in” to the basic
setting in order that the more dramatic, otherworldly elements can be
appreciated and experienced to the fullest. There are constant visual
references to the original film, and it’s worth being familiar with it in order
to really grasp the richness of Prometheus, as well as the difference between the
two films.
The main heroine, Elizabeth Shaw, is played by Noomi Rapace. There is
temptation to think of her as the “new Ripley.” Shaw is not Ripley. Not in the
least. The difference in character is actually a brilliant artistic choice: thirty-three
years after we met Ellen Ripley, our world is a very different place. Alien still packs a wallop, but it is
time for new heroes and new stories. Shaw is still very much a strong
character, but not in the way that Ripley was: not cold, not masculine, and not
utilitarian. She is a woman of conviction, of emotion, and of faith. I don’t
fully understand feminism and its development over the past decades, but I get
the sense that while Ripley was the right woman to root for in the Generation X
era, Shaw is a Gen Y heroine: warm, feminine, and spiritual, yet possessing a
deep strength of character.
This time around, Scott’s character development is a bit utilitarian.
Where Alien spoke largely in silence and subtlety, Prometheus is more
dialogue-heavy. I understood this choice to a degree – there’s a lot of
information to reveal and story to tell, as opposed to the rather minimalistic
script and cast of Alien. Still, I wish that sacrifice hadn’t been necessary,
because to me it was the main weakness in this otherwise excellent film.
Still, there were some good performances from the supporting cast.
Charlize Theron’s enigmatic, bossy corporate executive is toned down compared
to her evil queen in Snow White and the Huntsman, but still I thought a bit too
intense, especially since she wasn’t nearly as relevant to the plot as I had
expected.
Michael Fassbender played the android assistant. Despite the fact that
the character “had no soul,” he was the best defined character out of the
entire cast, except perhaps Shaw, and I largely credit Fassbender. It’s not a
particularly original character, but Fassbender put a lot into this paradoxical
archetype – profoundly human, despite being decidedly not human.
Other than these two, though, none of the other characters had enough screen
time to really stand out on their own. This is unfortunate because it would not
have taken much extra time to accomplish this. Perhaps we will see more
relevant footage in the DVD/Blu-Ray release, as with Blade Runner.
It is clear within the first fifteen minutes of the film what the goal
of the voyage of the starship Prometheus is – to discover meaning. This is one
of the most stark contrasts between Prometheus and Alien: where the crew of the
Nostromo were driven by the basic motivations of money and survival, there is a
sense of nobility, for the most part, about the main characters at least, and
even the crew of the ship. This again suggests a shift in the values of film
audiences over the decades. We have become more humanitarian in our mindset –
materialism is regarded as crass and inauthentic. A very interesting shift
indeed.
Prometheus wastes no time in getting the plot moving. Again, due to the
significantly broader scope than most of the other Alien films, a more
economical approach to storytelling was needed. As a result, though, the
element of mystery was a bit predictable, despite the fact that the plot really
hung on the discovery of the truth.
Fear is definitely an element here, but not as much as in Alien.
Additionally, the kind of fear is different. As opposed to the more
Lovecraftian approach taken previously, fear in Prometheus is more obvious and
imminent – not of the unknown, but of discovery, of the truth. Whether intended
or not, the message is clear: what you are out to find, you may not like when
you find it. In this sense, Prometheus is more science fiction than horror,
which also is appropriate for the age – the unknown does not interest
contemporary audiences as much as the immediate reality and its implications
for the future.
There is one exception to this. I promised no spoilers, so in keeping
with that I’ll be brief and abstract: there is one extremely intense scene
about halfway though, in which a very present yet unknown fear is the object of
attention. It is probably the most memorable scene due to how deeply it rocks
the world of the character experiencing the fear. Perhaps when more people have
seen it I will post again to discuss it in depth.
The emphasis on the sci-fi side of the setting is marked by an element
which in my opinion is sorely absent from a lot of science fiction these days:
wonderment. The characters’ encounters with very advanced technology and an
extremely foreign society inspire in them a sense of awe. This doesn’t happen
much these days. Too many characters take high alien tech for granted – they
are too genre-savvy for their own good, and, as a result, so are audiences. The
amazing discoveries made in Prometheus are treated with a due sense of
wonderment, of the specialness of the discovery. This is why visuals are
important in a film – not in and of themselves, but as a means to experiencing
something wondrous, something other than ourselves and our world.
One of the major strengths of science fiction is that it is an
excellent platform for philosophizing, and Prometheus is no exception. Shaw in
particular is a spiritually-minded person, and much of the metaphysical
discussion goes on around her. The fact that she manages to reconcile her
incredible scientific discoveries with her faith in God shows remarkable
strength of character, and reminds us of an important fact – “Why are we here?”
is not the same as, “How did we come to be?” This is particularly relevant for
Christians today. We must not let science negate our relationship with God, nor
the opposite. Facts are facts, but truth is truth.
Shaw is driven not only toward meaning, but toward relationship, from
which meaning is derived. She has
maternal instincts, a desire to “create life.” Even this is consequential to
her faith, because a significant theme in the film is the relationship between
a creator and creation. There is a great deal of tension between these two,
even elevating to hatred at times, yet truth and hope for reconciliation are
still held to.
Prometheus is a great film: definitely the best of the summer so far,
and among the best of the year. In making it, Scott along with writers Jon Spaihts
and Damon Lindelof respond to the call of the artist: to grasp at the most
profound meanings of life; to excel at their craft and create beautiful, deeply
human works; and to honor the past while creating something truly new.
Go out and watch it.
