View topic - [TRAILHEAD] Ridley Scott's Prometheus Viral...

unforum
a.r.g.b.b

Welcome!

New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.

Website Restoration Project

This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.

Announcements

This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.

This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.

Our Esteemed Contributors

The time now is Mon Nov 25, 2024 11:48 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)

View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum

Calendar

Forum index » Archive » Archive: General » Old News & Rumors

[TRAILHEAD] Ridley Scott's Prometheus Viral...

Page 102 of 168 [2517 Posts]

Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, ..., 166, 167, 168 Next

Author

Message

index
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 86

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

To be honest, I think that's an interesting spin on the things, because people won't be expecting that.

Maybe, but then again, that's overlooking the entire Male Rape aspect of Alien (1979) that had everyone up in arms. That was confirmed as a delivery device by Foster himself, so a gay scenario isn't as shocking as it initially appears.

Quote:

O'Bannon himself later described the sexual imagery in Alien as overt and intentional: "One thing that people are all disturbed about is sex... I said 'That's how I'm going to attack the audience; I'm going to attack them sexually. And I'm not going to go after the women in the audience, I'm going to attack the men. I am going to put in every image I can think of to make the men in the audience cross their legs. Homosexual oral rape, birth. The thing lays its eggs down your throat, the whole number.'"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(film)

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:23 pm

JustThinking
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2012
Posts: 107

blackfeathers wrote:

kampra67 wrote:

JustThinking wrote:

DrBunker wrote:

Almost certainly trout-worthy but I was looking at the video again and noticed a dot on the lower, large black sphere as it hits 10 seconds. I don't recognise it from earlier versions and it seems odd to have something appear on a stock sphere image. Thoughts?

I stared at that video for quite awhile- yes that is new- the medium black sphere. And the grid lines are gone?

edit- Where is the video from? I just looked at timeline and corp investor page- and they look like old with grid & no black sphere.

Just checked the bg video against a copy I made last week. The sphere with the dot is the same then as now (last copy was 22nd).
The less direction there is in the ARG for us, the more we start to see things that might not be there. So I'd put that down to noticing something that you didn't before.
The grid doesn't appear if you look at the video directly but is visible if you are looking at the video as part of the background to the website e.g. investors page r about us etc).

to clarify, the grid is a css layer overlaying the video. either the mp4 or ogv sphere video plays under it.

grid:
https://www.weylandindustries.com/img/wc_bg-grid.png

underneath it plays one of these videos, depending on browser support:
https://www.weylandindustries.com/vid/wc_spheres.mp4
https://www.weylandindustries.com/vid/wc_spheres.ogv

Yes, I understood you meant it was an overlay- that makes sense. And the medium dark sphere is there- but it is hidden under the terms and conditions bar- so I didn't notice it before.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:25 pm

index
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 86

tpbiv wrote:

Quote:

Re: LV-426 Planetoid (moon)

In Alien, there were 3 moons around the 'ringed giant' planet.
Also, you see a ringed giant on the promo shot/clips.

Maybe its just one of the other moons, or way far away on the same one, moons can be huge.

Just guessing.

http://www.projectprometheus.com/image.php?id=3

Take in the scale of the body in the upper left and trace its outline. That object is enormous, and in the foreground relative to everything else in the 'sky'. To be that close to another body, it would mean that either the planet(oid) they are landing on is very small, which would mean that its gravity would be significantly less than what they show walking around normally, or the two spheres are in such a rapid rotation to offset each other's gravity that the surface would probably be hopelessly violent.

The planet they're on has a proper atmosphere, another signature of a large mass.

I think we're punching holes through overanalysis, maybe, but then again, I'd love to factor in the given that Scott would insist on relatively accurate expressions of Newtonian theory.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:32 pm

FilmEdge
Unfettered

Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 645
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

Thanks for the kind words on my post, and good follow-up comments, all.

antovolk wrote:

SLUSHO_ZOOM! wrote:

antovolk wrote:

AVITWeb wrote:

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

raygendreau wrote:

I am convinced the planetoid LV-426 as described in Alien is the same planetoid the Prometheus lands on in the Prometheus movie. There is a slim possibility that they land on one of the other two smaller planetoids orbiting the ringed gas giant. The ringed gas giant can be clearly seen in the Prometheus trailers and the opening scenes of the Alien movie.

It might be in the same system, but look at this picture. The ships landed differently (vertically instead of horizontally), and unless the temple gets destroyed in the process, there was no evidence of it anywhere in Alien.

Could have easily fallen over..high winds, ground movement, etc.
Devil's advocate. Razz

The shots of Shaw/Vickers running away, they're running from the slip which is rolling over after that crash, IMO

I agree... the ancient ship has attempted to take off... either they have tried to stop it and succeeded or perhaps what is attacking the humans has attacked the awakened ancient astronaut and causes the crash.

Well we do see in the trailer that the Prometheus crashes into the derelict, and no it's probably not at the end because the editors were given the full film apart from the final 11 minutes (the rumoured Alien DNA bit)

You beat me to it: I was also going to say that I think the Prometheus deliberately crashes into the Space Jockey ship to *prevent* it from leaving, as the SJ's may intend. I hesitate to call it the 'derelict ship' since, thus far, we can't prove this is Acheron LV-426.

It is interesting that the Timeline calls out discovery of Acheron has having both a planet and moons that are conducive to supporting life. Yet by ALIEN, LV-426 is very inhospitable, stormy, unbreathable, etc. And in ALIENS, LV-426 has apparently only improved enough to have breathable atmosphere thanks to WY processors ("We manufacture those, by the way."). If it took all that work just to make LV-426 even tolerable to humans, why was it pointed out as such a good prospect by Weyland way back in 2039? "Weyland expects to travel there within the century."

My guess is that despite the Timeline calling out Acheron, this isn't the same place in PROMETHEUS. What we see doesn't fit with LV-426's film history so far. I know my first instinct when I saw the ship fall over was that this was a precursor to ALIEN on Acheron, but these appear to be very different places weather-wise and all else. Unless the Nostromo crew land on a *different* "habitable moon in the same system, of course � the old Ceti Alpha 5 bait-and-switch with Khan, as it were.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:32 pm

FilmEdge
Unfettered

Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 645
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

index wrote:

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

To be honest, I think that's an interesting spin on the things, because people won't be expecting that.

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(film)

There was also the early character development that Ripley and Lambert might also be lovers. If memory serves, this idea was introduced partially due to the logic of such long trips/duty tours, that often such multi-partner or same-sex relationships would develop rather commonly given the lack variety in dating options. I believe it was also implied that same-sex relationships would be commonly accepted in society by their time, and indeed any controversy arising from them would only be a reflection of our culture � as O'Bannon (quoted above) was quite comfortable targeting as a method of creating layers of dramatic tension.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:40 pm

blackfeathers
Decorated

Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 268

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

blackfeathers wrote:

hehe, I hate to play Devil's advocate once more, but one early bit I ran across which came from the production camp itself was that there is supposedly a sex scene involving two men.

I would be delighted if this were not the case, mind you. Live and let live, and no offense to any gays whatsoever, but absolutely no interest here in seeing even a cursory treatment of a butt love scene in a film I have the worst jones in half my life to see..The connotation here is that Scott was looking to exploit something galvanizing to shock the audience, and chose homosexuality for that purpose.

To be honest, I think that's an interesting spin on the things, because people won't be expecting that. Sexual preferences aside and all, I think Hollywood is extremely conservative when it comes to same-sex relationships (even if there's no sex on screen involved), and in turn moviegoers consider it shocking and off-putting. If it was more common (in a respectful way, of course), more people would be tolerant towards it. It's all about prejudices, and mind you, I'm not judging you at all while saying this, but I do think this shouldn't be much of an issue.

I don't think it's the case because of Shaw/Holloway's relationship, I can't imagine Holloway cheating her with an android, of all things. I'd cheat her with Vickers, maybe Very Happy

while it looks like i was quoted, that was index who said that. Smile

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:55 pm

FilmEdge
Unfettered

Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 645
Location: Burbank, CA

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

Also I'd like to add something to what FilmEdge wrote, which elaborates some of the ideas I've thought about and others that have been posting here: When people talk about immortality and life extension, they often neglect brain deterioration, namely Alzheimer. It's bound to happen, after a certain age the braincells die and the thought processes are impaired. This is something not every sci-fi writer is concerned about, but even considering that Lindelof and Spaihts didn't have that in mind, I'm sure Mr. Weyland will be portrayed as an insane man. He may seem still smart, but having lived past his prime and still looking for ways to keep himself from dying might've turned him crazy about the idea, and in turn make him dangerous to himself and others around him.

Adding to that there's another company fighting against Weyland Industries in order to control the resources on Earth, which is most likely Yutani Corporation... This adds more stress to the already frail mind of an old man like Weyland, and the outcome will most surely be negative.

You bring up a great point, Seven, which hinges on the "exact" date of Peter Weyland's "death" (or lack thereof). With the WI website boasting that life expectancy now averages into the late 80s or mid-90s for humans, then Peter Weyland "died" quite young circa 2065, at the tender age of 74. This is a good 10-20 years below the WI-enhanced average, and let's face it: if ANY human alive would have benefitted from Weyland medical care and advancement, it would be Peter.

So if he died � or was put into stasis, more likely � in 2065, then his brain was not considered "old" by current standards. In effect, I think Peter lived as long as he could to 'pave his way to the stars' via Weyland Industries technology: top-notch health care to extend his life and forestall aging/disease, stasis technology to stop aging/death all together, hypersleep to survive a long voyage and FTL propulsion to get ships to distant planets. This may well avoid all the "immortality" pitfalls of human frailty that you rightly bring up... and Peter, of all people, would have seen it exactly that way.

As many pointed out before and after my comments: Peter is acting as a benefactor to humanity, but is probably doing so as a by-product of his own personal, selfish motives.

Great screen cap to post, @Jane Smith! This also would seem to support that Peter might have been "reanimated" at (roughly) age 74 as requested once his "mission objective" was at hand. Given WI life expectancy of age 80-90, theoretically he could have a decent 10-20 years to enjoy the fruits of his labor once brought out of stasis for his "close encounter" with ... whatever.

He's not just wanting to live a long time, but he appears to have an agenda... a goal toward which his prolonged or extended life is aimed. A purpose that he can't live long enough to meet naturally, but one he can reasonably predict will be realized if he can cheat death for a few decades then be 'reborn' to witness himself.

Hence my speculation about his Promethean/Frankenstein curse: Peter Weyland, living monument to hubris, has lived his life playing God to better humanity's lot and his own, with the idea of living long enough to discover some cosmic, Godly, forbidden secret about the origins of human life itself. And once he discovers it, not only might this knowledge spell his doom, but also the potential doom of humanity he was attempting to 'save' from death in the first place.

In the same live chat I referenced before, a fan asked a great question about the Prometheus myth and various Christian elements which overlap somewhat. Both Scott and Lindelof were excited by the question and elaborated surprisingly well considering how the topic appears to define the theme of the film. In the end, Lindelof said (paraphrasing, I may not have the exact transcription), "Is there any scientific discovery that could be made in my lifetime that would stop me believing in God? It's a provocative question and we certainly don't have the answer, but the movie is asking that question."

Big ideas left unanswered, indeed. But it seems clear Peter Weyland is overstepping those godly boundaries in his personal pursuit, and typically that never ends well.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:08 pm

index
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 86

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

FilmEdge wrote:

I believe it was also implied that same-sex relationships would be commonly accepted in society by their time, and indeed any controversy arising from them would only be a reflection of our culture � as O'Bannon (quoted above) was quite comfortable targeting as a method of creating layers of dramatic tension.

Agreed. You know, though, when you apply some hindsight, its kinda funny that homosexuality was considered an exposition tactic by Hollywood back then, considering how obvious it is to us today just how much gay culture was thriving in Alien v1's time, and throughout its existence, pervasive in Hollywood itself. I mean that's one of the most persistent themes from the late 70's early 80's, etc. There was a lot of social ignorance that hilariously allowed gay culture to flaunt itself openly without being recognized for what it was, but by no means was it a fringe element in society, even then.

Back to the characters, in the Wikipedia entry, its discussed that each of the film's characters were provided extensive written back stories to assist in fleshing out personality and relationships.

If anyone has ever seen, or knows where, or has any copies of those character studies, PLEASE let me know; I'm dying to get my hands on em if they're out in the wild.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:22 pm

index
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 86

FilmEdge wrote:

As many pointed out before and after my comments: Peter is acting as a benefactor to humanity, but is probably doing so as a by-product of his own personal, selfish motives.

My own pet theory is that everything needed to comprehend Weyland's motives can be found in the materials index on the Investor's page:

Eitr, Lead, most conspicuously, Carmot, these are all identified historically as properties utilized in Alchemy.

Alchemy is not a social endeavor; its about as personal as personal gets.

I think all the achievements in the Timeline are trickle-down by-products. Weyland is after Immortality, the ultimate manifestation of Greatness, which he himself states he's stop at nothing to achieve in the TED speech.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:44 pm

SevenSonicStructures
Decorated

Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 172

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

FilmEdge wrote:

My guess is that despite the Timeline calling out Acheron, this isn't the same place in PROMETHEUS. What we see doesn't fit with LV-426's film history so far. I know my first instinct when I saw the ship fall over was that this was a precursor to ALIEN on Acheron, but these appear to be very different places weather-wise and all else. Unless the Nostromo crew land on a *different* "habitable moon in the same system, of course � the old Ceti Alpha 5 bait-and-switch with Khan, as it were.

This is what I've been insisting for a while, and here's another reason why: I don't think they'd have bothered to make a prequel out of this just to directly reference and involve things from Alien like that, it'd have seen cheap and predictable. Obviously, one may wonder about the reasons Ridley Scott had to go back to his previous lauded works and make spinoff films based on them and simply claim "money", but one shouldn't forget that Alien and Blade Runner (yes, there's a sequel/prequel being considered too) are unapproachable by the common moviegoer due to its amount of visual detail and plot, and he has said he hated the treatment other directors gave to the Alien sequels (aside from Cameron of course). He wouldn't cheapen this for a quick buck.
Simply put, had this been Acheron LV-426, they wouldn't have been so secretive with the plot and wouldn't leave much room for speculation since we already know how it'd go.

blackfeathers wrote:

while it looks like i was quoted, that was index who said that. Smile

Oops, I copied the wrong quote. Sorry about that.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:53 pm

SLUSHO_ZOOM!
Unfettered

Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 311
Location: NYC/BROOKLYN

Wondercon Exclusive Trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpLH9ocVxAs

<iframe></iframe>

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:08 pm

SevenSonicStructures
Decorated

Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 172

How many trailers are out already? 5, 6? Very Happy

I'm liking the new scenes though. In one of them you can see Shaw shaking while she's with the rest of the crew!

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:25 pm

FilmEdge
Unfettered

Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 645
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

SevenSonicStructures wrote:

This new moon in PROMETHEUS *not* being Acheron LV-426 also makes ALIEN and ALIENS make more sense plot-wise in a larger 'franchise' sense: the discovery of the beacon from the derelict ship on Acheron in ALIEN becomes a priority because Weyland-Yutani programming of Mother basically realized, 'Holy shit, we found another one!' It catches them by surprise, apparently, and they act hastily to deal with it via the Nostromo crew. Rather than replaying the events of PROMETHEUS (thus cheapening the value of the 'sequels'), the point of ALIEN becomes "Oh no, this isn't over yet!"

In short, nothing in PROMETHEUS automatically "undoes" events in ALIEN, but rather ALIEN is a continuation of the same plot complication which first arose in its "prequel". To tell it in chronological order, ALIEN is a sequel to PROMETHEUS, telling a tale about how this 'curse' hasn't ended at all. The other shoe drops, as it were.

Assuming events are true as given from the 1979 film, the beacon signal was discovered (or at least heard) by Mother and her programming awoke the crew. While her programming (and the crew's contracts) to investigate intelligent signals is convenient, it might also be a sign of WI purposely planting the seed for more (re)discoveries of the Space Jockey race and/or the Xenomorph species, the latter to be harvested for weapons tech in the ALIEN era. In a way, this alien signal clause is Weyland's policy of "Keep watching the skies just in case there's more (PROMETHEUS mystery source) out there."

Had the Acheron signal been beaming for years and discovered before events in ALIEN, WY would likely have sent more appropriately trained/equipped personnel to investigate it... not a crew of mining tow "space truckers" to go get it. This seems to ensure that the signal was "new" and WY insisted the closest personnel from the Company go have a look at all costs (per Ash), being unprepared or unable to rush a better-trained crew out there. And indeed if Ash was *not* pre-programmed with such orders about the Acheron signal/mission when he joined the crew (he says he has no idea what the derelict ship is when they see it), then he received his orders on-the-fly once landing on the moon... which may explain why he handled his mission so poorly in terms of android-human interface ("There were a few deaths involved.").

So, if the Acheron signal in ALIEN was a true, current-time discovery as evidence seems to support, then this can't be Acheron LV-426 in PROMETHEUS, or WI would have known the "derelict ship" was there all along after the PROMETHEUS era events.

If written well, prequelizing this franchise could work out to the benefit of ALIEN and ALIENS � unlike another popular franchise that went backwards and suffered for its prequels.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:48 pm

SevenSonicStructures
Decorated

Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 172

Re: LV-426
Planetoid (moon)

FilmEdge wrote:

And indeed if Ash was *not* pre-programmed with such orders about the Acheron signal/mission when he joined the crew (he says he has no idea what the derelict ship is when they see it), then he received his orders on-the-fly once landing on the moon... which may explain why he handled his mission so poorly in terms of android-human interface ("There were a few deaths involved.").

This is terrible news for the Prometheus crew then, since it's sort of implying they never got out of the planet to send information regarding the alien technology, or at least a visual recognition of the space jockey ship.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:57 pm

JustThinking
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2012
Posts: 107

index wrote:

FilmEdge wrote:

As many pointed out before and after my comments: Peter is acting as a benefactor to humanity, but is probably doing so as a by-product of his own personal, selfish motives.

My own pet theory is that everything needed to comprehend Weyland's motives can be found in the materials index on the Investor's page:

Is Alchemy about as scientific as Astrology though? Would a real scientist have any interest in it?

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:28 pm

Display posts from previous: Sort by:

Page 102 of 168 [2517 Posts]

Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, ..., 166, 167, 168 Next

Forum index » Archive » Archive: General » Old News & Rumors

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum