1) Here's the first thing you need to know before seeing Prometheus – and, truthfully, it goes for any work of art – Wait. You know what? I've said this already, in The Drowning Girl: A Memoir. So, I'll just repeat myself:
This is the book it is,
which means it may not be the book
you expect it to be.
That is the sort of thing that should be obvious to everyone. But it's not. In fact, this sort of things is only obvious to a few people. But, yes, before you see this film, accept that it's the film it is, not the film you think it will be, or want it to be, or need it to be, or whatever. Otherwise, you're crippling it – and your ability to appreciate it – from the outset.
2) Okay, by now everyone here ought know that I can't see in 3-D, as I have one functional eye and, therefore, lack binocular vision, which you need to see 3-D films as 3-D films. Also, most 3-D films are gimmicky abominations that destroy any hope of good cinematography, and I am generally opposed to 3-D on this principle (Not because I can't see it, though I think some believe my inability to see 3-D is why I hate 3-D). So, we had to find it on a 2-D screen. We almost always go to Warwick Showcase, which has two large screens and can usually be depended upon to screen "big" films on "big" screens. Yesterday, we struck out. Because they'd put motherfucking Madagagascar 3 (in 3-D!!!!) on one of the two big screens, which left one for the 3-D showing of Prometheus. Which put us in a closet. We could actually see the edges of the screen around the picture and the glowing green exit sign in the lower right-hand corner of the screen. So, I would say, yes, I have watched this film, but, no, I have not seen this film. Scott even (as Roger Ebert points out) manages to make a 3-D film that doesn't look, in 2-D, like a 3-D film (much as Cameron did with Avatar). But then, despite Scott's achievement, that pathetic excuse for a screening room butchered it.
It's sort of like this: You get the chance to fuck Natalie Portman, but you have to do it in the worst toilet in Scotland. Sure, you have undoubtedly fucked Natalie Portman. No argument. But, how would it compare to getting to fuck Natalie Portman in the luxurious Empire Suite of the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan? Or, hell, in your own bed in your own apartment? This is the tyranny 3-D is imposing on those of us who cannot see (or do not want to see) 3-D films. Until I can fuck Natalie Portman in my own bed, I'll not truly have seen Prometheus.
3) This is just the tip of the iceberg regarding issues of continuity, but: Prometheus DOES NOT take place on the same planet (actually large moon) as does Alien (1979) or Aliens (1986). Both of those films took place on a planetoid designated LV-426. Prometheus takes place on a planetoid designated LV-233. Both orbit, presumably, the same gas giant. But they're different planets, and that's important. Very few people are picking up on this. That said, there's is not perfect continuity between Prometheus and the four films to which it is, ostensibly, a prequel. Some of these discontinuities can be accounted for by the fact that we do have events occurring on two different planets. As for most of the others, the other discontinuities, I think Ridley Scott says it best: "For all intents and purposes this is very loosely a prequel, very." And in very loose prequels, we do not get perfect continuity and one-to-one correspondences, so, if you fault the film on that, you've not done your homework. And your expectations have defeated you. And we're back to my first point on this list.
Here ends Part One of my observations and reactions to Ridley Scott's Prometheus. To be continued.
Now, I suppose I need to get to work.