Alien: Covenant (2017)

Alien: Covenant (2017)

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Michael Fassbender, Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Danny McBride, Demian Bichir, Guy Pierce, James Franco, Noomi Rapace

Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979), is one of those seminal horror films that changes the face of a genre so much, that it marks the way the genre will be for years and years to come. How many movies have imitated the style, the look of Ridley Scott’s original monster movie? Many that’s how many.I could write a list of films that look and play out exactly like it: Alien Contamination (1980), Galaxy of Terror (1981), Outland (1981), Leviathan (1989), Event Horizon (1997)…and the list goes on and on. Ridley Scott left that Alien franchise after having directed that first film and the sequels that followed were directed by talented directors that took each film in totally different directions, which is why I love this franchise, each director has put his stamp on each film, so they are all extremely different. Now if we fast forward a few decades, things have come full circle. Now Ridley Scott has retaken the franchise as if saying “this is my baby and I’m going to make it my freaking legacy to the world!” Which is what Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are, these films represent Ridley Scott’s reclaiming the franchise he started. Does Ridley Scott still have it?

Alien: Covenant is a direct sequel to Prometheus (2012), just in case you had your doubts. This is the story of how the xenomorphs came to be, those nasty sharp teeth, perfect killing machines with acid for blood. Alien: Covenant is the second film in a planned trilogy of prequels, they tell us the story of how the infamous aliens came to be. When Prometheus came out, audiences complained about the lack of xenomorphs, audiences wanted more of the creature that frightened them so much in Alien (1979), they wanted the horror element amped up, the wanted that nail biting, heart pounding suspense they got that first time around. But I like Prometheus for what it is, part of a trilogy of how these creatures came to be, it’s the back story. With Alien: Covenant we can definitely see a story unfolding. There are some surprises in store for fans of the Alien franchise, my mind was blown. I mean, yeah, these prequels are deeper and more profound, but that has to do with the fact that Ridley Scott has grown as a filmmaker, he has a lot more to say about life, hence, the difference in tone between these new prequels and the classic Alien films.

And speaking of depth and themes, what I enjoy about these prequels is that they explore the origins of man. Who would’ve thought that the Alien movies would end up touching such heavy themes? But here we are considering themes about the origins of man, about death, about who made us. The exploration of these themes begins with the introduction to androids, synthetic beings who are capable of thinking and feeling like humans. Similar to us in every detail save for one: they can outlive us. Questioning death and begging the universe for more life is a theme that Scott has been exploring since Blade Runner (1984) a film in which we have renegade androids begging their creator, their “father”, for more life. So yeah, Ridley Scott’s exploration of heavy philosophical themes continues in Alien: Covenant. These are questions that need answers, and Scott knows they cannot be ignored. After all, these are "the big questions" in life. It doesn’t surprise me that these are themes Ridley Scott has chosen to explore now, at the end of his career and last half of his life. Scott is probably feeling extremely identified with the themes explored in these films, questioning life, questioning where we came from, who made us and ultimately: why must we die? As I write this, Sir Ridley Scott is 79 years old!

Ridley Scott does not forget that the franchise started with what is essentially a monster movie, a horror film, and a very good one at that. When we go into top horror movies ever made, there’s no doubt Alien (1979) will make the list. And Ridley Scott knows that. So with Alien: Covenant he seems to want to go back to that horror, the spine tingling, nail biting suspense. And I have to say that Scott nailed it. There are some genuine scary moments here, there’s gore, there’s blood. Yes my friends, this one amps up the terror. But the great thing about Alien: Covenant is that it doesn’t forget that it is a sequel to Prometheus. So it’s like we get half of the philosophy and deep themes of Prometheus (2012), and half of the horror and suspense from Alien (1979), so it should satisfy both camps.

The film works even better because it has an awesome cast, and a very eclectic one at that. Here’s Danny McBride doing a serious role, he doesn’t do bad at all I have to say. But if one performance stands out it has to be Michael Fassbender in the dual role of David and Walter, the androids of the film. I simply love Fassbender in anything he does, but here he clearly plays two different roles and it is magnificent. But then again, so many things are magnificent here. The screenplay is so poetic, so good, the dialog sounds beautiful with many references to classical music and poetry. By the way, you’d do good in reading Percy Shelley’s sonnet ‘Ozymandias’, it comes into play at one point in the film. Finally, the production itself is gorgeous looking, the sets, the ship designs, the alien designs I mean, this film is simply beautiful to look at, which comes as no surprise in a Ridley Scott film. So go see this completely satisfying sequel! Here’s hoping this one makes some cash at the box office so we can get to see the next and final film in this prequel trilogy!

Rating: 5 out of 5      

  

Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)

Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Christian Bale, Joel Edgerton, John Torturro, Ben Kingsley, Sigourney Weaver, Aaron Paul

Every time Ridley Scott makes a movie I consider it a gift from a cinematic god, so of course I was pumped when I heard that Scott would be directing this biblical ‘Magnus opus’, it seems right up his alley for various reasons. Number one is the fact that he is a master at making the fantastic believable, no matter how complex or how out there, he can make it real. This is something a lot of directors’ continually try to attempt yet fail horribly at; just take one look at Roland Emmerich’s 10,000 B.C. (2008) and you’ll see what I mean. Secondly, Egyptian civilization, pyramids and huge columns have always formed a huge part of Ridley Scott’s film aesthetic. Actually, while watching certain scenes in Exodus, I got a few Blade Runner (1982) flashbacks. Take a look at Blade Runner again and you’ll see just how influenced by the Egyptian civilization Blade Runners art design was, you’ll see pyramids all over the place. So anyhow, with Exodus, Ridley Scott went from the futuristic pyramids seen in Blade Runner, to depicting the actual first pyramids ever made, which in a way brings Ridley Scott's cinematic career full circle.

From the pyramids in Blade Runner (1982) (above) to the pyramids in Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014) (below)

Currently we’re going through a religious revival in Hollywood, I guess this is an attempt to infuse society with ‘belief’ as a way to reinforce religious ideals in society, something I’m completely against because I imagine, like John Lennon, a world without religion, where we can be the rulers of our own destiny. But  alas, we live in a world where the grand majority of people are under mind control, and religion plays a huge part of that. Yet, oddly enough I find these biblical movies fascinating anyways because I seem them for what they are, stories, fantasies meant to enlighten us entertain us and maybe show us a thing or two along the way; nothing more. So, this review comes from a non believer who still finds movies like this entertaining. I mean, I loved the heck out of Cecil B. Demille’s The Ten Commandments (1956)! That film is so entertaining, so theatrical and so freaking epic! Of course, Ridley Scott had a lot on his plate, he not only had the responsibility of pleasing all those millions of Christians out there by keeping things somewhat faithful to biblical cannon, he also had to turn in an entertaining film that surpasses anything we’d seen before in terms of spectacle. Question is, did he achieve it?

A lot of things went right with this movie, for example, its scope brought to mind those old biblical movies like Ben-Hur (1959) and Cleopatra (1963), these are films filled with thousands of extras and incredible sets, wardrobe an art direction. I’m happy to say that that’s the kind of film you get with Exodus: Gods and Kings. You certainly won’t feel like you are being short changed with this movie, you’ll see the millions up on the screen. The detail paid to minutiae, is amazing. The carvings on the swords, the thrones, the walls, is just stunning, you’ll believe this is the Egypt of the bible, the film is very convincing in my book.  

One of the things that matters the most for a film of this kind to be successful is that it has to be faithful to the bible, or else the core audience will boycott the movie. In this sense I predict that theaters will be packed with religious folks, as opposed to say a film like Noah (2014), which got everything wrong by changing the story around so much that it alienated its target audience. Religious people didn't get the Noah that they wanted, so they didn't exactly back the movie up, if anything some Christians went to see Noah simply to see how wrong Aronofsky got their beloved biblical tales. This does not happen with Exodus: Gods and Kings which sticks pretty closely to the bible. Sure Ridley Scott takes a few artistic liberties here and there, but overall the story you get is the story that’s in the bible. Moses becomes the leader of the Hebrews, becomes their savior and with gods help, he frees them from the oppressive choke of the Egyptians.

My only problem with the film is that the story is way too epic for one film. This story could have easily been divided into two or three films and it could have been told better. As it is, at times I felt like the story was going in fast forward, skipping important moments that you'd expect to see. We go through the ten plagues, suddenly boom, we’re traveling through the desert, suddenly boom, we’re at the red sea, and boom it’s Ten Commandments time. Biblical events feel rushed, and a lot of important moments where left out. For example, the moment in which Moses turns his staff into a snake, or the moment when the Israelites get tired of waiting for Moses to come down from Mount Sinai so they build their own god and start worshiping a golden calf, then god opens the ground and swallows them up for being unfaithful to him. Why leave stuff like that out? I guess the movie would have been  four hours long if they did, which is why I say this film could have easily been turned into two films.  This is the reason why DeMille’s The Ten Commandments (1956) was divided into two segments, with an interlude for you to go tinkle. In his version, DeMille didn’t cut corners, he told the full thing and took his sweet time to do it. He’s cut of the film is ten minutes short of four hours! The problem is that Scott decided to tell the tale in one film, and my opinion, the story suffered because of this. Ridley Scott either chose to tell an incomplete tale, or a lot of footage was left in the cutting room floor and we might get to see it eventually in a directors’ cut. Still, the film remains amazing, remains epic, it’s just missing certain key moments that only true Christian fanatics will notice were left out.

This film has gotten some heat because supposedly it’s emotionless, but I disagree; I actually think it had a lot of emotion. There are some truly tender moments between Moses and his wife where we see a kinder, gentler side to the great leader. I guess what people are referring to is that Ridley Scott decided to go with a more believable way of telling this story, he avoided augmenting the supernatural elements whenever he could. I mean, sure we see lots of miracles happen (the ten plagues are simply amazing) but Scott found a way to explain most of them scientifically, they aren't just magical events. Even the parting of the Red Sea seems like the tide simply goes down in intensity till the people can simply walk through, Moses doesn't use his staff like it was a magic wand on this one. I guess we could say the film isn’t overly dramatic or theatrical and whenever it can it simply avoids the supernatural. This might take some as a surprise, especially for those who are expecting a huge special effects driven film or operatic performances. Here the effects are used with subtlety, yet when they appear they are a true wonder. Performances are also toned down when compared to Charlton Heston’s old time theatrics.

I enjoyed the amazing cast here, the only downside is that we have a lot of good actors in minor roles. John Torturro plays the pharaoh which took me by surprise. Ben Kingsley plays a Hebrew elder, but again, so underused. I mean, here we got Sigourney Weaver doing next to nothing on this film, same goes for Aaron Paul, but whatever, I hear the original cut of this film was reportedly four hours long, so we might be seeing more of these actors on a directors’ cut of the film, who knows. Final words is, Ridley Scott had a huge tale to tell here and even with these compromises I've mentioned, we still got an amazing film that can be appreciated by both the Christians who want to see their fantasies brought to life on the silver screen and by those film lovers who just want to see a good film. This is without a doubt a strong film and if you ask me, one of the best of the year.

Rating:  5 out of 5

  

Death and Androids: Explorig the Themes of Blade Runner (1982)

Blade Runner, like so many of Ridley Scott’s films, is an immersive experience. The world of Blade Runner is constructed in such an intricate and layered manner that you can’t help but get lost in the film. Aesthetically speaking, it’s one of my favorite films because it’s just beautiful to look at, those scenes with flying cars over a futuristic skyline filled with metal pyramids? Count me in! A lot has been said about Blade Runner as the quintessential cyber punk film because it’s about androids and because it’s set in a bleak future, like so many of William Gibson’s cyberpunk novels. Who is William Gibson you ask? Well, he’s the father of cyber punk that’s who; Gibson’s the guy who practically invented what we now know as 'cyber punk' through a trilogy of novels, the first of which is the seminal ‘Neuromancer’. If you want to truly find out what cyber punk is all about, I recommend starting there. But Blade Runner is based on Phillip K. Dicks ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’; a novel with its fair share of cyber punk elements, some of which bled onto the film. As a side note to this article, I'd like to mention that the book and the film are two different things all together, so you might want to try and read the novel, it’s an entirely different experience. Actually, you might end up being surprised just how different book and film are! How different is the book from the film? Well, the books main theme is religion! The film has nothing to do with religion! The book explores a whole different set of themes and has an entirely different tone to it. The book remains a special experience, I highly recommend checking it out! The difference between book and film points to one thing, what an amazing filmmaker Ridley Scott is. He basically took the world that Phillip K. Dick presented us with in his book and weaved a story that played with other themes  which though different, are equally relevant.   

Harrison Ford and Ridley Scott

For the longest time, I would just watch Blade Runner because I loved that world, the look, the feel. And you have to admit, the film is a lush production, it’s not a cheap looking film. But it wasn’t until adulthood that I started to appreciate the film from a whole other angle, I started to realize that there was a lot more to Blade Runner than flying cars and murderous androids. What was Blade Runner really about? What was it commenting on? The films central theme is mans own disillusionment with our short time on this earth. We come and go in the blink of an eye and when you really stop and think about it, it’s a really sad thing how short our lives are. I mean, our lives can be so rich, filled with so many memories and experiences, but as Roy Batty muses in the climax of the film, all of it just fades away when we die. When Roy Batty goes up to Tyrell, his creator to ask him for more life, Tyrell tells him it’s not possible, but not without offering a glimmer of hope to Batty’s preoccupations about death. Tyrell tells Batty “The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long, and you have burned so very, very brightly Roy!” In this sense, the films offers us the only glimmer of hope when it comes to death, we have to live an amazing life, try and leave our mark in the world, to make what little time we were given matter.   Unless you lived an outstanding life and shined so brightly that your mark will be indelible for time immemorial, chances are, no one will even remember you were 100 years from now. So let’s make that time count my friends!

Now, taking all that in consideration, what would you do if you could go up to your god and ask him or her for more life? What if you could have a conversation with your creator, what would you say? I’d ask him why he allows decease, dictatorships and death. I’d ask him why he is so silent and apparently not even here. In Blade Runner, the Nexus 6 androids or ‘Replicants’  to use the term that they went with for the film get to actually talk to their creator, the “God of bio-mechanics” as Roy Batty calls him. They question him about why they die so soon, they want more life, they want for the god of bio-mechanics to let them into "heaven" so to speak. Problem is that the engineers who made the Nexus 6 androids gave them a four year life span. Why? Because if given any more than that, they get too smart, revolt and kill their masters. When given more than four years to live, the Nexus 6 would get too independent, volatile and unpredictable and that’s not what the powers that be want with a serving class; nope, they want the working class dumb and controllable. Here the film also offers us an interesting allusion to class issues. Should we take our given place in society? Or should we aim for more? The androids in Blade Runner want just that, they want to be like their creators. So, in order to keep the androids from rebelling or getting smarter, as a failsafe device, the Tyrell Corporation gave the Nexus 6 replicants only four years to live, after which they expire and die. In other words, the Nexus 6 are conscious of their mortality and they will fight it to the bitter end. 

So it is with some desperation that Roy Batty and his gang of androids manage to find Tyrell himself in order to ask for more life. Sadly Tyrell tells them that it’s not possible, essentially denying Roy and his crew of life. The frustration is so huge that Roy kills Tyrell, his creator, but not before telling him “I want more life fucker!”  To me this is the most pivotal scene in the whole film because it lets us know exactly what the film is about: our frustrations with death. At the same time, this scene offers some of the films most shocking and daring ideas. On this scene, Tyrell plays the role of God, the creator, while Roy Batty plays the role of the human, close to his death bed, asking god for a few more years. Again, what would you ask God if you were ever face to face with him? Well, Roy asked for more life and when he was denied it, he killed his creator, a shocking idea if you ask me, that of killing God. It’s not just any movie that will deliver the idea of anger and hatred towards God, but this one has the guts to do so. The films characters show certain contempt towards God for not having given us longer life. In this film God has created imperfect creatures with the ultimate decease: death! Not so different from the world we live in if you ask me! But, was Roy Batty justified to do what he did? Did his plea have any weight to it?

Well, if you ask me, Roy Batty may be the villain, but it feels to me like his plea is genuine, it has validity. To Batty, death just isn’t fair. He has seen and lived so much; he is frustrated that it’s all going to fade away “like tears in the rain” as he so eloquently puts it in the last moments of the film; which reminds me just how beautiful and poetic the ending of the film is. I mean, to be honest, I completely get the villain of the film, he may be a bit ‘batty’  as his last name implies, but you have to admit, his anger and frustrations are very real, it’s a cry out to life and death. Roy Batty is a desperate individual, but you have to understand, the guys body is freezing up! He can’t feel his fingers! His skin is turning white! He has to penetrate his fingers with rusty nails in order to make himself feel alive.  I compare this to those moments we’ll eventually get to in our life when we start feeling the aches and pains of old age and we start doing everything we can to battle it. We go to the gym, we eat better, we go to the doctor, doing whatever we can to fight what’s inevitably going to come. Yup, there comes a time in everyone's life when we simply won't run as well, when our resistance will be less, and we'll get tired faster. At some point in our lives, our energies will no longer be what they used to be. Our bodies will sooner or later start to show signs of wear and tear and we'll see death rearing its ugly head.  I find those last scenes in Blade Runner when Roy Batty is reminiscing about the beauty of life, when he starts remembering about that “he has seen things that you wouldn’t believe” just beautiful, like an old man remembering all those experiences he once lived and enjoyed; in many ways, Roy Batty has a lust for life, which is why death deeply saddens him. I have to admit, that scene always gets to me.

"All those moments will be lost in time...like tears in the rain"  

As an artist, Ridley Scott is obviously terribly concerned with death, which let’s face it, is kind of one of the big mysteries of life. What happens when we die? Where do we go? Do we truly just vanish? This is why inquisitive characters have always been a part of Ridley Scott’s films, so they can ask the big questions. Most recently in Prometheus (2012) he revisits the exact same themes as he played with in Blade Runner, but with a slightly more existential twist to them because in Prometheus characters aren’t just asking for life, they want the answers to the big mysteries of the universe, they want to know where we all came from as well. Prometheus is less subtle with its themes; it asks its questions louder. It proposes that our creators not only don’t like us, they also want to wipe us out like some failed experiment that has to be started over again. Hell, even Ridley Scott’s brother, director Tony Scott was obsessed with this theme of death as well; I guess it runs in the family? For example, Tony Scott’s The Hunger (1983) has David Bowie playing a half vampire who is searching for a scientific solution to old age and death. Again the idea is visited on that film, can life be expanded? Can’t we live just a little more? But going back to Blade Runner, this is a film that is extremely consistent with its death theme, for example, when Deckard is confronted by one of the androids in a fight and the android tells Deckard “Wake Up! Time to Die!” we are reminded that it’s not only old age that can kill us. And then again, in the ending of the film, when Gaff, who knows that Deckard has fallen in love with an android, tells him: “Too bad she won’t live. But then again, who does? “  And I think that ultimately, that is the films final message, that we should live our lives as passionately and as intensely as we can, because death will be a part of it, eventually.

   

Prometheus In-Depth Analysis

Prometheus was one of the most anticipated films of the year for me and many film lovers. A Ridley Scott film, in my opinion is always a major event, he is after all one of the most important filmmakers of his generation. As you might have gathered from my review for Prometheus, I love Ridley Scott films for many, many reasons, still, I have no problems in pointing out a disappointing one if I ever see one. For example, the last Ridley Scott film to underwhelm me was Robin Hood (2010). I enjoyed it, but wasn’t floored by it. Though well made, I found it boring. I wasn’t a big fan of G.I. Jane (1997) either. Point is I don’t blindly love Scott’s films. No filmmaker is free of making a dud or two; but Prometheus wasn’t a disappointment in my book. I recognize that it isn’t perfect film though. Some characters do pretty stupid things when they should be acting more professionally; like that guy who starts playing with a potentially dangerous alien life form like it was a cute little teddy bear or something? The idiot! But can that scene really be considered a major flaw? Not in my book, there are a lot of idiots out there, that guy happened to be one of them.

The interesting thing about a lot of Ridley Scott’s most recognized films is that at first they weren’t big hits with the masses. Two good examples are Blade Runner (1982) and Legend (1985); both huge flops when they first premiered in theaters. Yet right now they are both considered some of the best films within their genre. Now here comes Prometheus, again, a film that a lot of people have felt disappointed by. It was not a flop in theaters, or a failure in the true sense of the word (it’s still making money around the world) the problem with it was that even though there was a huge hype surrounding the film, it didn’t make as much money as expected. I think people were expecting another film like Alien and Prometheus was anything but that. Alien was a straight forward horror film, Prometheus isn’t. Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) was a far simpler film than Prometheus. Alien simply wanted to scare, while Prometheus aspires to explore deeper themes about life and the universe we live in; we can’t blame a filmmaker for wanting to go in a deeper and more cerebral direction with his new films. But this shift in tone was not received well by the masses. The masses wanted people running from Aliens and shooting guns, what they got was a film that wanted to explain the origins of humanity. The result was a smaller intake at the box office then expected. Still, that’s fine by me; I don’t consider Prometheus to be a film for everyone. It doesn’t have mass appeal. The masses love stupid films, Prometheus was not.

The following article aspires to analyze Ridley Scott’s Prometheus. If you haven’t seen the film, then please don’t read this article because I’ll be analyzing major plot points and themes. If on the other hand you have seen it, and want to read my thoughts on the films themes, then continue reading my friend!

  

ORIGINS OF MAN - WHO MADE US?

The questions of who made us and where do we really come from have always been a major issue for deep thinkers. The thing is that once you eschew the many teachings religion has to offer  about the origins of man, then you are left with zero answers. The scientific mind will rarely acknowledge anything related to religion because scientists by nature need proof. That’s what science is all about, making a hypothesis, and then proving it. If you can’t prove it, then it’s just a hypothesis or a theory. In religion, when something can’t be proven, it’s called faith. For scientists, religious explenations are closer to fairy tales than anything else, for the philosopher, this holds true as well. Truth of the matter is we still don’t really know who made us; the perennial question lingers on.

Prometheus is an interesting film because it’s one of those films that dares to give explanations for the origins of man other than the explanations that Christianity teaches. The daring part is that the film doesn’t tell us that humanity was created by Christianities ‘God’, the film tells us that it was other beings known as ‘The Engineers’. The idea that maybe aliens designed us and that we are somehow linked to them is not a new one, for example, it had been explored before in films like Brian De Palma’s Mission to Mars (2000) and Alex Proyas’ Knowing (2009). Mission to Mars actually has many similarities with Prometheus, watch that film again and you’ll see what I mean. The same themes are touched upon.

The alien beings in Brian De Palma's Mission to Mars (2000)

Prometheus starts out with these amazing vistas of Planet Earth. We see mountains, waterfalls, cloud formations, basically, planet earth at it’s most glorious. The idea being that maybe the Planet was here long before any life form came to it. Then, a huge spaceship leaves an albino, bald, and extremely muscular alien being behind. The alien seems to be wearing ceremonial clothing of some kind, leading us to believe that maybe this whole event has a religious connotation for the alien beings. The being takes a sip of something that begins to degenerate his body, soon, the being falls to the water as his body continues to disintegrate in the depths. Then, the camera does an extreme close up and focuses on the beings DNA which appears to be disintegrating and forming itself back again; we are looking at the origins of man. “Big things have small beginnings” a character says at some point in the film, this was the small beginning of man.

 

So this is a brave film, because according to it, we weren’t created by the Christian idea of ‘God’, it was beings from some other planet. But of course, the question still remains, if they created us, and they are ‘The Engineers’ of humanity, then who created them? There is always something bigger behind everything. Who is that one final being who created everything anyways? I love it how the film attempts to answer some questions, but makes even bigger ones. 

   

 THE QUESTIONING OF CHRISTIANITY

The films protagonist, a scientist by the name of Elizabeth Shaw is a Christian. According to her, Christianity is what she’s chosen to believe in because it’s what her father believed in, and therefore, his beliefs where passed on to her, which is something that happens to a lot of people. You probably ended up believing in Jesus because that’s what your parents taught you, but does that mean it is right? Or even real? Maybe, maybe not, but like Elizabeth Shaw, when one is confronted with the validity of their beliefs, the answer is sometimes “because it’s what I choose to believe”, not because you have proof, or because you know what you are believing in is right, but it’s what you’ve chosen to help you get through life.

This is another theme that the film addresses, the idea that we got to believe in something even though we might not be entirely sure if it’s true or not. For example, my belief system is a bit more grounded in reality. I personally believe that we don’t know the truth about anything, that the universe is the biggest thing out there and that there is a lot we don’t know. If it was by me, we would have sent out a spaceship to explore the universe a long ass time ago, Star Trek style.  I personally just accept the big mystery until that fateful day when we’ll finally know THE REAL TRUTH.

But Prometheus is a film that questions Christianity a lot. For example, when the scientists in the film are finally gearing up to meet with the alien beings, Charlie tells Elizabeth that she should throw away her cross, alluding to the idea that maybe Christianity is all fairy tales and that what they are about to meet out there is the real deal. I found it interesting how Elizabeth Shaw never throws away her cross. Maybe it’s because it belonged to her father and it reminds her of him so it has more to do with sentimental value than beliefs, either way, the cross Elizabeth Shaw wears through out the whole film is an important symbol. It means that until she finds some real answers, she’s not willing to let go of the beliefs she grew up with. After all, that’s exactly what this movie is all about, finding answers to the big questions in life and until Elizabeth finds them, she’s sticking to Christianity. But I like the fact that her search is never ending.

Elizabeth Shaw never looses her faith

At one point in the film, the character of Peter Weyland says that because of all we have achieved so far as a race “we are the Gods now”. Somebody created us, but we can also create life ourselves, even artificial life. Right now, we can create computers and robots that think for themselves, but how long  before we can create androids like the ones presented in these films? In Prometheus, humanity has reached the point where they can create androids that live forever (!) and are almost indistinguishable from man! In the film we are similar to Gods in the sense that we can create. According to Biblical and Greek Mythology, the gods don’t like it when we are like them. It’s the reason why they punished the god Prometheus and sent him to Tartarus; a.k.a. HELL. According to the story, Prometheus shared the secret of fire with man, in this way bringing us closer to Godhood because of it. The idea being that knowledge is power, and ultimate knowledge has made us Gods. What drives the characters in this film? The search for answers to the biggest questions; its that thirst for god like knowledge. Mans thirst to KNOW, which strangely enough is considered a sin in the bible. In the tale of Adam and Eve, when they take a bite from the tree of knowledge, they were expelled from paradise! So to the Gods, no matter what religion, knowledge is not something they want us mere humans to have, knowledge is what makes us like them.  

   

 WHY DO OUR CREATORS WANT TO DESTROY US?

In Prometheus The Engineers of humanity have now turned into the would be destroyers of humanity. The big question that arises in the film is why? Why do they want to wipe us out? One scene has Elizabeth Shaw confronting The Engineers, asking them why do they want to destroy us? This idea of Gods destroying their creation is not new at either. If we go back to the bible itself, God was once so displeased with humanity that he wiped it all out, save for eight people he thought were good enough to save. I’m speaking of course of the biblical story of Noah’s Ark and how he and his family where saved from the worldwide deluge that God sent humanities way. This is the idea that we are presented with in Prometheus as well. The Engineers have created a deadly life form that they intend on releasing upon humanity. When David, the android of the film finally discovers how The Engineers computers work, he learns that their final destination was earth and that their deadly cargo was destined for us; what they really wanted to do was destroy us. The idea being that our creators are ashamed of us, same as God was ashamed of having created humanity in the bible.

This idea is an interesting one when we take in consideration how messed up the world truly is. So many shameful things happen ever second of every day on our planet, that if  alien beings were watching us, analyzing our behavior, I wouldn’t be surprised if they decided to wipe us out. Let’s see, nuclear weapons, child slavery, rapes, violation of human rights, despotic governments, greed, murder, war, famine, you name it, if it’s evil, its happening on Planet Earth!  If there is a God, and he’s watching what’s going on down here, he HAS to be ashamed. I would have pushed that restart button a long time ago; as one of the characters in Prometheus says: sometimes, in order to create, one has to destroy.  

 ACCEPTANCE OF DEATH “EVERY KING HAS HIS DAY, THEN HE DIES”

It’s interesting that one of the main characters in Prometheus is an android who will live forever, way past the lifespan of its own creators because this film is all about humans wanting more life. Same as the ‘replicants’ in Ridley Scott’s own Blade Runner (1982), one of the humans in Prometheus is after more life. I’m talking of course of Peter Weyland, the owner and founder of The Wayland Corporation, the company in charge of space exploration in the Alien universe. You see, in the film Peter Weyland is dying, but before he dies he wants to meet The Engineers in order to ask them for more life, same as the replicant Roy Batty in Blade Runner wanted to meet his creator to ask him about: “Something a little more radical…death” If you remember that scene, Batty then picks up Tyrell and tells him “I want more life fucker!” I found it interesting that the need that the androids of Blade Runner have is now the need that humans have in Prometheus. Basically, we don’t want to die. As I said in my review for Prometheus, I think it’s fitting that Scott, now 74 is asking these questions. He must feel like Roy Batty or Peter Weyland himself; getting close to death, and not wanting that day to arrive. 

Rutger Hauer as replicant Roy Batty in Ridle Scott's Blade Runner (1982)

All these great things we see and do, they all fade away as soon as we die, sometimes forgotten forever. How many lives blink out of existence, never to be thought of ever again? The character of Roy Batty said it very poetically in Blade Runner: “I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-Beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain…time to die.” Of course, since this is a film that addresses big questions and themes, the theme of death could not be left out. It is mans greatest enemy and one of the grandest themes one could address in a film, which is why I appreciate a film like Prometheus, it touches upon so many important themes, leaving them there for us to ponder and think about after the film is over. On Prometheus, the final thought on death is mentioned when the character of Meredith Vickers tells her father Peter Weyland: “A King has his day and then he dies” That is the truth about death, we have our days on this earth, we better make the best of them because then we die, and the ride is over. 

THE SEARCH FOR THE REAL ‘TRUTH’ NEVER ENDS

Finally, one of the things I loved the most about Prometheus was its ending. When Elizabeth Shaw finds that other ship and takes off towards the planet where ‘The Engineers’ supposedly come from. To be honest, that ending offers up so many awesome possibilities for a sequel. What planet will Elizabeth Shaw arrive at? What discovers await for her out there? Will she find the true engineers of humanity, or something greater? Whatever Elizabeth Shaw’s out come maybe, I loved the fact that her final words were her signing off and saying that her search never ends, that her search for truth continues. This is my goal as well, the never ending search for the real truth. Well, my friends, this has been The Film Connoisseur. I should reach the frontier at some point, with a little luck; the network will pick me up. This is Franco, one of many survivors on spaceship earth…singing off.  

Prometheus (2012)

Title: Prometheus (2012)

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, Guy Pearce, Patrick Wilson

Ridley Scott’s most recent foray into science fiction -Prometheus- is in many ways different then its predecessors and in many ways the same. As I’m sure many of you know, Prometheus is a prequel to Ridley Scott’s own Alien (1979), the film that redefined sci-fi films and kick started the whole alien franchise. It also happens to be the first science fiction film from Ridley Scott since he made Blade Runner (1982). It’s interesting how Scott denied that this was a prequel for a while, only to later admit that the film does in fact take place within the same universe. That’s right my friends, Scott is playing on familiar ground here. The art design for the interior of the spaceship looks like something that might have come out of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1969) or Scott’s own Alien; you know, lots of white corridors, very cramped, very claustrophobic. Same as all the other films in the Alien franchise, The Wayland Corporation is the company that oversees space exploration; and same as all previous Alien films, every spaceship gets an android to accompany them. So yeah, this film has a certain familiarity to it for fans of the Alien franchise; the question on my mind was what was going make this one different?

On this film we meet a group of archeologists/scientists that are hot on the trail of humanities origins. They are after the answers to the biggest questions in life: Where did we come from? Who made us? And why did they abandon us? Their search begins with  a series ancient paintings they find, in all of these ancient paintings from different eras in human history, the same image is depicted: humans pointing to the same constellations in the sky. So they zero in on this constellation and embark on a journey towards this sector of the universe, hoping to find the engineers of humanity. Will they find what they are looking for?

To me, Ridley Scott is this cinematic god, he makes movies that I end up falling in love with and can watch over and over again; so of course, seeing this movie in theaters was a major event for me! Like the Greek story of Prometheus, Scott’s films feel like stolen fire from the gods themselves. The worlds Ridley Scott creates are so rich and detailed that he can make a fantastic setting a reality; Blade Runner (1982), Legend (1985) or Gladiator (2000), no matter how fantastic the setting, these worlds feel real, complex and intricate. Another thing that distinguishes Ridley Scott’s films is that they have the highest production values. He makes sure he’s working with the best of the best in order to produce a high quality film. This is also the case with Prometheus, one look at the film and you can just tell that the people that were behind the cameras knew what they were doing. For example, the visual effects work in Prometheus is flawless. This time though, I have no idea who the conceptual artists behind Prometheus are; I don’t know who’s handling the visual effects or the make up effects; to me Prometheus is Scott working with a whole new generation of creative talents; which of course is great, if you’ve seen Alien, then you’ll feel a familiarity with this world, yet at the same time, it will feel new and fresh. I love how Scott’s approach towards visual effects is “if you can do it live, do it live”, an advice given to him by fx guru Douglas Trumbull while filming Blade Runner. This is the main reason why Scott doesn’t overdo CGI; if he can build a set, he will. This kind of filmmaking adds a level of realism that is quickly disappearing from today’s films, where sometimes they construct only half a set, or only the floor is real; not so in Prometheus where Scott spent a large part of his budget on good old fashioned set construction. Normally I hate CGI, but I've always said that when it's done well, it really, really works. Im glad to say that Prometheus is one of those rare occassions when CGI is done right.

Both Alien and Prometheus have certain similarities, but the differences are evident as well. For example, while Alien was a straightforward horror film and for all intents and purposes a monster flick, Prometheus is more of a philosophical film. Like many of the best science fiction films, this one explores the bigger question that humanity asks itself like for example: where the hell did we really come from? And therein lays the crux of this film. It questions religion; it questions the existence of god. Should we believe in life after death? Why are there so many different beliefs on the matter? Could it be that no one really knows the answers to these questions and so we simply choose to believe what we want about the after life and God? This is the main reason why I loved this movie so much; it asks these big questions and actually attempts to answer them. Prometheus basically summarizes where humanity stands with regards to these questions. Yet the film doesn’t eschew the Christian angle of things, actually, Christianity is represented through its main character Elizabeth Shaw as played by Noomi Rapace. Interestingly enough, I wasn’t expecting for Prometheus to touch upon some of the themes that Blade Runner plays with, namely, why we die. This is the reason why I love Blade Runner so much. It has its android protagonists ask their creator for more life. Prometheus also plays with these ideas, which I found fascinating considering Ridley Scott himself is getting pretty old. I’m sure this is a theme that matters to him as a filmmaker now more than ever; so he touches upon it yet again on Prometheus. This is probably why we have characters addressing the issues of life after death, or characters simply wanting, searching to elongate their lives, this once again, and same as Blade Runner, is a film about accepting death. “A King has his reign and then he dies, it’s inevitable” says Meredith Vickers to her employer Peter Weyland; by the way, to me, Scott expressed a lot of his concerns about death through the Weyland character. After all, Scott was 74 at the time of making Prometheus! My admiration goes out to Mr. Scott for making such an amazing film in his golden years. 

Ridley Scott made Prometheus at 74, that's what I call one tough cookie! 

The great thing about Prometheus is that even though it tackles all these philosophically heavy themes, it does not forget to entertain. We get some awesome looking aliens and creatures on this one! Fun stuff! A bit gruesome at times, but then again this is probably why the film earned (thankfully!) its “R” rating. Yet, when compared to Alien, Prometheus feels sometimes a bit constrained on this department, you can tell times have changed, there’s not a lot of blood on this one. But things do get gruesome, and gory believe it or not, the film plays a fine balance in my book between showing you just enough mayhem. Finally, I will say that I was not one bit disappointed with this film. I don’t get why people are saying that it’s flawed? Flawed how? I guess comparing it to Alien is the reason, but we have to remember, that even though Prometheus is obviously linked to the Alien universe of films, it’s still its own beast. It’s obvious that Scott was aiming for a film with its own personality and uniqueness, not a film that felt like it was walking on tired ground. Maybe the scientists don’t act professional enough at times and get themselves into peril too easily? Almost as if they were asking for it? Maybe…but then again, we have to remember this is also a horror film; characters have to put themselves in peril! Highly recommend it, in my book this film was nothing short of epic, amazing, thrilling…top notch, cutting edge filmmaking at its best. This is Scott showing us he’s still got it! I can’t wait to see what he’ll do with that Blade Runner sequel he keeps talking so much about. Prometheus gets the highest possible recommendation from this Film Connoisseur!

Rating: 5 out of 5

Alien (1979)

Title: Alien (1979)

Director: Ridley Scott 

Cast: Sigourney Weaver, John Hurt, Tom Skerritt, Harry Dean Stanton, Ian Holm, Veronica Cartwright, Yaphet Kotto

Review: 

Alien is what this Film Connoisseur calls a perfect film, not a single thing is wrong with it, every single moment, frame, shot, performance, effect is top notch perfect. Without a doubt, one of the greatest science fiction films ever made which is why I am excited as hell for Ridley Scott's Prometheus (2012). Why am I excited for Prometheus? Well, let me count the ways. First off, Prometheus marks Ridley Scott's return to science fiction, a genre he hasn't revisited since he made Blade Runner (1982) all those years ago. The thing about Ridley Scott is that he's the kind of director who likes jumping from genre to genre. He'll do a sci-fi, he'll do a sword and sandal, he'll do a chick flick, he'll do a period film, a war film...you name it, and Scott has visited that genre. One of the few genres he hasn't done is a western, but I bet if he did a western, he'd do the best damn western you'll ever see. And thats the thing about Scott, whatever the genre he is tackling, you can rest assure that he will do it justice. You can rest assured that the film he is working on will be a good representation of the kind of film he is making. For example, look at Legend (1985) Scotts foray into the realm of fantasy films. Without a doubt, one of the best fantasy films ever made. So yeah, of course I am jizzing in my pants over Prometheus premiering next week. The previews let me see that I wont be dissapointed. It just looks like it will blow my mind, I hope that it will. Scratch that, I'm damn near sure it will, it's a rare occassion when Ridley Scott dissapoints with a film. So all things considered, I thought it would be a good idea to revisit Alien, the film that started the highly successful Alien franchise, and the film that directly connects to Prometheus. 

Prometheus will finally shine some light on this dead aliens origins

Alien is all about these space miners traveling back home on their spaceship 'The Nostromo'.  They are ready to kick back, relax and take that ten month journey to earth. Who knows, maybe they'll even get a bonus. Unfortunately, along their treck home they come across a beacon from a nearby planet. What could it be? Is it a distress signal? Where is it coming from? Wayland Yutani, the corporate monster that pays these space miners, sends them to investigate the alien planet with the insentive that they'll get a share of whatever they find. Could it be an alien spaceship? Could this be humanities first encounter with a lifeform other than themselves? 

Weaver plays Ripley, the heroine of these films

This film has many good things going for it. I love it because I am enamored of films that take place in the deep recesses of space. I've always loved this setting for a film because it alienates the human from its home planet, it creates an isolated environment which is the perfect mix for a horror film. And yes, make no mistake, Alien is a horror film, which makes it all the more interesting because I believe it's the one and only horror film that Ridley Scott has ever made, and again, it's a damn good one. Its a damn perfect horror film actually. How perfect is it? Well, I've seen this movie many, many times over and there are these moments in the film that still get me no matter how many times I've seen it. The suspense can be cut with a knife. Ridley Scott really knew how to orchestrate a film that would scare the pants off off anyone who saw it; which is why I'm also looking forward to Prometheus. Scott has gone down saying that all he wants to do is scare the pants off his audience and I'm looking forward to that! Especially when it's such a masterful director doing it. 

Ridley Scott was 40 when he made Alien

But what elements make Alien such a perfect blend of science fiction and horror? Well, the talent behind this film is astonishing to say the least. The people involved in it were some of the best writers, artists and filmmakers the world had to offer. First up, Dan O'Bannon wrote the film. Dan O Bannon wasn't just any old writer, this was a guy who knew the horror genre, he knew science fiction films in and out. He was a geek supreme; he knew what was cool, what worked. For example, one of Dan O Bannon's first forays into filmmaking was a little indy sci-fi film called Dark Star (1974). Don't know how many of you guys out there have seen Dark Star, but it was John Carpenter's first full length film. It's not the best film ever made, but it showed promise. Is the film horrifying? Is it trying to be funny? I still dont know exactly how to define it. To me Dark Star was simply a group of hungry, yet extremely creative people testing their filmmaking skills for the first time, trying out this filmmaking thing. The results are amusing, but obviously very low brow, very low budget. The monster on that film was a beach ball for christ sake! You have to see it to understand what I'm talking about. Ultimately, Dan O Bannon wasn't too satisfied with the resulting film, but this was a good thing, because it's what propelled him to write and have a burning desire to make a serious, more threatening science fiction film. He was going to make sure that the creature on his next science fiction film was not a beach ball. This burning desire to make a more convincing and horrifying villain is probably what gave birth to one of the greatest monsters in all of filmdom: the alien. The result of O'Bannon's frustrations was a screenplay called 'Star Beast', ultimately, O'Bannon himself changed it to 'Alien' because of how many times the word Alien appeared on the script. And so, the first steps towards getting Alien made had been taken. 

H.R. Giger's 'Necrom IV' the painting that decided how the titular alien was going to look 

But it wasnt just Dan O'Bannon's excelent script that made Alien a winner. The conceptual artists behind the film where some of the best science fiction/fantasy artists to ever walk the face of the earth. I'm talking about Jean Giraud a.k.a. 'Moebius' and the always excentric and down right creepy fantasy artists known as H.R. Giger. Ridley Scott was worried about how the alien would look, it was one of the few things that truly worried him during pre-production for the film, but once he saw H.R. Giger's painting known as ' Necrom IV', he knew his worries were over. He immediately contacted Giger and asked him to work directly in the design of the Alien, the results where nothing short of memorable. Giger even designed the interiors of the alien spaceship! While Giger worked on the creature designs, Giraud contributed with the look of other elements onthe film. Giraud's style is present on the Nostromo's many hallways and the spacesuits that the miners use. Giraud was a great asset to this films set designs and art direction. Moebius was a true visionary, he never stopped drawing fantasy and science fiction. He contributed on many film projects; for example, he was responsible for the look of Luc Besson's The Fifth Element (1997), the look of the glowing suits in TRON (1982). He worked a bit on Masters of the Universe (1987) a film that looks a whole lot better than it should thanks to Giraud's contributions. Point is, whatever film he was working on, you could rest assured that it was going to look that much more unique and interesting, he was going to make it a better film simply because of his involvement. Sadly, this hero of mine recently died on March 10, 2012. He left a lasting mark on the art world, and on many of the films he helped create. Just remember, whenever you see those cool looking suits and spaceships on Alien, that's Jean Giraud's contributions to the film. The mechanical creatures built to bring the alien to life where constructed by the legendary Carlo Rambaldi, the guy behind such creations as E.T. The Extraterrestrial (1982) and the giant sandworms of Dune (1984). So I think it's safe to say we had a powerhouse creative crew behind this film. Topple that with the fact that Ridley Scott was behind the camera and you got yourselves a masterpiece my friends. 

Jean Giraud contributed largely to the look of the film

So yeah, we had an incredible group of creative geniuses behind this film. Whenever any film gathers such an amazing group of individuals, you can be sure that the film is going to be something special. And Alien turned out to be just that. It was a huge financial success, it spawned three direct sequels and two spin off films which pitted the Aliens vs. the Predators from the Predator films. Comic books, video games, toys have all been made based on the film, and lets not forget the many rip offs that this film spawned! Dont believe me? Well, heres a couple of films influenced by Alien, check them out and tell me if I'm not right: Leviathan (1989), Galaxy of Terror (1981), Outland (1981), Inseminoid (1981), Creature (1985), Star Crystal (1986) and the Italian Rip Offs (we couldn't leave those out now could we?) Contamination (1980) and Alien 2: On Earth (1980). And that's just the tip of the iceberg, Alien influenced many more films then the ones I've just mentioned. Whenever a film impacts the film world in this world, it means it's made an impression on people, it means that it's not just any film, but a special film, and this my friends is what Alien is, a special film that still manages to spook and amaze with it's pitch perfect suspense and astounding visuals. Ridley Scott amassed this amazing amount of talent for this film because he himself is an artist, a visionary. Many of the shots on this film could be paintings, you could just freeze frame these and put them on your wall, which makes Alien not just a sci-fi/horror film, but a work of art. Each film in the Alien franchise is special for its own different reasons, different directors have brought their unique visions of this universe, the result is an interesting bunch of films, but with Prometheus, Scott is returning to the universe he helped create which is why I'm so looking forward to seeing it. Look forward for my review of Prometheus in the coming weeks, hopefully it will be another genre defining film, from a director who loves wowing us, and as far as I'm concerned still has the capacity and creativity to do it. 

Rating: 5 out of 5

This moment still gets me ever single time I watch the film!