"we were so wronged..."

Rating: 1/10 (7 June 2012)

This is my first review and it may very well contain spoilers (although it is not the point here).
I am not going to list bad points and plot holes as a lot of people have already done it, and some really were quite funny in doing so (thank you ian_span !). I just would like to share my view about it, as I have been deeply disappointed by this train wreck of a film.
My first statement would be to explain my view of the responsibility for this failure, because failure it really is. Although the real culprit is in the writing of the cardboard characters, their abnormal behavior and the idiotic dialogs and interactions, the true responsibility lies with Sir Ridley Scott. When you get double billings for production and direction, you cannot run away from your responsibilities (they will roll on you like a doughnut shaped alien spacecraft (WTF!!!)).
I don't agree with all the supposed plot holes mentioned in other reviews. Although the writers are opened fans of Chekhov and his gun (every odd or out place item is to be used further down the road), the story makes more or less sense (as far as considering it panspermia more then intelligent design) if you pay attention to what Deus Ex Machina, euh... sorry, David, and the 16 idiots say during the film. But I have to admit it is a hard task to do, so the writing is idiotic, and it may require several viewing.
No, the real problem is the characterization. They all are adults but react like toddlers. They are supposed to be doctors and scientists but acts like village idiots (surprising for a trillion dollar investment, no?). And what a captain!?! Dereliction of duty or plain incompetence are the closest explanations to his behaviour! He has 2 scientists lost and leaves without any support! There is a mountain of dead aliens piled in a corner and he does not even think to inform anyone about it?? The other problem is the lack of tension. All the supposed fearful moments only involve the robot... how are we supposed to relate to that? Because he is supposed to have been designed to act like a human and use a space suit to make it easier for the other idiots to interact with it, we have to relate to him?!? What the hell is that??? Well it is simply at the image of the rest of the movie: Hyperconvolution, everything is made to be taken way too seriously (e.g. Sir Ridley Scott HAS the answer to the beginning of life!!) Beyond the magic of the medpod staples (my wife wants to know the address for her next C-section!), the main character is really far from Ripley. If there were a fight, my bets would all go to Ripley and Sigourney Weaver. Noomi Rapace is a lovely looking lady but she is no match here. And as casting goes, what is the matter here: aren't there any good English actress so that you have to hire a Swedish one and force a derivative uneven accent? Or if you absolutely need the Swedish flavor, can't the script be accommodated for it and the character named accordingly?? The same goes for the use of a younger actor to play a near death elderly Peter Weyland... was it only for the sake of the viral marketing? If so, it tells a lot about the motivations at stake here. Personally, I would have used this great Guy Pearce for something else then just wearing this ineffective make up. He would have done an excellent Holloway.
On the bright side, the visuals are great. The effects are excellent... as you would expect! But if only to see this, I watch NatGeo. The score is highly ineffective and here again derivative. It does not build tension, it's plain annoying! Actually, the more I think about it, the more I feel sour about the whole experience. When I think about all Sir Ridley Scott's statements (deconstructing and reverse engineering of the first Alien to respect a technological chronology, scaring the living s**t out of me, ...) and the viral marketing at play, and when I compare it to the actual product, I think there is place for class-action law suit!