Prometheus is the most unambitious ambitious film ever made

Rating: 4/10 (27 June 2012)

Prometheus is the most unambitious ambitious film ever made. It seeks to ask the biggest questions of all, but in the most facile and sophomoric way possible. It is visually stunning, but intellectually prosaic, original and derivative. Yet, up to the final act, it creates and maintains a level of wonder that only the best sci-fi can. Ultimately, however, it wastes it with what has to be one of the most disappointing final acts of all time. It is lack of focus that lies at the heart of the failure of the film. It tries to combine the intellectual and philosophical inquisitiveness of 2001, with the horror and thrills of Alien. Unfortunately, the inherent tension that exists between these two completely contrasting styles of film renders Prometheus impotent. Scott fails to realize that in order for Kubrick to develop his concept as powerfully as he did, he needed to forgo traditional notions of structure or characterisation, which is at complete odds with what made Alien so successful. In that film, Scott chose to pare back the concepts in the film completely, instead focusing on characterisation, pacing and a watertight structure. By trying to combine elements of both, Prometheus fails to match either. The most successful elements of the film occur at the beginning, when we are presented with ideas rather than having them explained to us. The opening scenes, featuring amazingly eerie shots of natural occurrences coupled with an equally strange figure, establish a great tone for the film. The introduction of the idea that aliens designed us is handled well, if rapidly, and our first glimpses of the planet are very effective, as is the structure they visit. As with the opening shots, the best parts of the opening two acts occur when the characters say nothing, that is, when the set design and special effects are holding out attention. Scott is nothing if not a visual director and this is no exception. Like 2001, we are presented with stunning images in these first two acts, whether that be of the planet itself, or the giant metal face at the alter. However, while Kubrick was content with letting the visuals reveal the concept, Scott tries to develop characters who can articulate his, which is where the first the real problems begin. While all the characters are clichéd and direct from the playbook of interstellar voyage films, this could be excused if their roles were limited. Unfortunately, Scott attempts to give them dimensions, though as with the tension mentioned earlier, he never allows enough time for them to actually develop. So, the beginnings of a history between Shaw and her father is alluded to; the two pilots are given a repartee related to a bet; and the classic 'odd couple' trope is partially established between the geologist and biologist. While these aborted attempts at characterisation are not unforgivable, they do distract from what is actually interesting about the film – the meanderingly enticing pace that allows us to become enveloped in the world created. However, from the third act the wheels completely fall off the film, and quickly. Consider the difference in the pacing in this third act. At first, Scott allows us to explore the structure along with the crew – we find out information as they do, and given time to contemplate how this may relate to the questions we are asked about the origins of life. However, the film suddenly launches into overdrive, with plot developments and technically impressive, yet emotionally pointless, action scenes are thrown at us. This rapid and unaccountable change in pace only works to separate the audience from the film; while in Alien we are slowly brought to the crescendo, here we are forced into it. This causes bizarre inconsistencies such as the almost comical way Shaw interacts with the captain after her operation: she does not feel it worthy to mention that she just aborted an alien hybrid, and he does not find it interesting enough to mention the five dead crew who were just attacked by the reanimated body of another member of their party. Multiple plot holes are also created here, the most glaring of which being Shaw's assertion that the engineers had 'spared' earth, despite 15 minutes earlier saying they were 'delivering death' there. While these problems are unfortunate, the real disappointment lies in the treatment of the original concept that propels the film. While questions about the origins of life can be interesting (though they are all pretty much answered), and the concept of an original cause is tantalising, Prometheus is content to deal with both in the most uninspired of ways. Instead of trying to engage with how this changes our conception of our place in the universe, the prospect of other life, or discovering the mechanics of how we came to be, given the engineer's bath-bomb like help (did we still evolve through the mechanisms we thought or did they guide us? If so, how did they do it?), the film chooses to focus on the most uninteresting of adjuncts: religion. Evidently, Scott and his writers thought that making Shaw religious immediately gave the concept depth - that simply making these references to Christianity meant they were being profound. Inevitably for such a boring inquiry, their examination only gets as far as the stuporous 'I choose to believe', this despite that fact that, if her own thesis is correct, Shaw's Christianity cannot possibly be. Similarly, the teleology is compared to our relationship with robots, and again this is only developed to the extent of David being told he doesn't have a soul and can't understand concepts because he is not human. The actual difference between us, given that we were 'designed' by mortals, and him is never actually considered beyond this most basic of ideas (to see a much more interesting consideration of this idea, look to Scott's Blade Runner). Ultimately then, Prometheus is a technically impressive film that lacks the very soul it wishes to examine.