Comments on: The Science of Prometheus

By: Steven Novella

Steven Novella — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:00:29 +0000

Christopher – I agree in that I can enjoy a sci fi movie for what it is and I don’t require them to be science lessons. However, there are limits. If the science gets too bad, it takes away from the story. It may also represent lazy writing, and so is just one symptom of overall bad story telling. (which is the case here, in my opinion).

There were also problems with this movie that go beyond the science. The characters and plot were terrible. It was beautiful, however.

By: Christopher_NW

Christopher_NW — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 13:55:01 +0000

I kind of don’t care. I thought the movie was awesome despite the gaps in science. It was art, not science, nor was it even art trying to masquerade as science. Enjoy it for what it is, a cool, interesting sci fi.

By: BurntSynapse

BurntSynapse — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:58:04 +0000

I’m curious if you saw the Star Trek by the Minute blog? Prometheus and the 2009 Abramanation of Star Trek share alot in terms of hideously bad writing, religious thinking.

Another gaffe no one seems to mention is that lunatic anti-social people are the last one’s corporate management would pick for a high-value project team.

By: KjetilM

KjetilM — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:59:37 +0000

Why oh why didn’t I read all the spoilers before seeing this movie.. then I could have saved me the pain of seeing this moive…

All the Scientist are Idiots and dies but the True believer survives.
That’s really all I can extract from the movie..

By: fxsoap

fxsoap — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:01:10 +0000

@pious

maybe it has to be….organic biological material?
Same reason it didn’t melt or destroy David’s finger..

By: pious fraud

pious fraud — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 13:19:29 +0000

Why doesn’t the black goo eat through the soles of their boots when they’re walking upon it in both scenes that take place in that apparent armory room?

By: Chris McGowan

Chris McGowan — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:54:31 +0000

I think the “there is a star in the system” problem is actually from the way the actor delivers the line, not from the line itself. The full line is “there is a star in the system…a lot like ours….” I think he added a pause for dramatical effect, when it really should have been “there is a star in the system a lot like ours…” Not that this validates the silliness of finding a planet based on a 35,000 year old cave painting…

I also think a lot of the criticism regarding the ineptitude of the scientists is a little off base. Yes, they are inept, but I don’t think this is due to poor screen writing. I think they are actually written to BE inept. If you think about it, the entire mission is simply for the sake of a dying old man who wants to live forever, and who is basing his entire expedition on some cave paintings.

I found it doubtful that he would a) have the time given his condition to find the absolute best scientists in their respective fields, or b) even be able to find qualified scientists, given the two and half year journey there and another two and a half year back, who would be willing to go.

I think the scientists do inept things because they ARE inept, and are actually written that way. Is it a coincidence that the geologist with the cool mapping gadget is the very same guy who gets lost, or that the biologist is the one that thinks its a good idea to touch an alien cobra swimming in black goo? If anything, the screen writers almost seem to make the scientists TOO inept just to get the point across that this is not a well thought out expedition.

By: Chris McGowan

Chris McGowan — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:46:04 +0000

By: You people just don’t understand how brilliant Ridley Scott is | Carl Sagan's Dance Party

Tue, 26 Jun 2012 14:21:24 +0000

[...] wrote in saying you didn’t like Prometheus. All of the objections are absurd, poorly written and full of complaint holes, but I’ll address them just to shut you up. If you haven’t seen the movie yet, this post [...]

By: RaySquirrel

RaySquirrel — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:12:10 +0000

Ridley Scott has stated that the planet at the beginning of the film is a red herring. It is not necessaryily Earth. So charges that Scott is promoting ID creationism are misguided.