Ridley Scott's much anticipated return to science fiction, "Prometheus", hits many cinemas worldwide this weekend. The film is already doing gangbuster business with $3.5 million from midnight screenings alone in the U.S. and a $50+ million weekend expected, an impressive feat for an R-rated feature.
Though going into the year it was a film many were keen to see, early screenings over the past two weeks may have dampened enthusiasm somewhat. Reviews on Rotten Tomatoes have it at 74% and a 6.9/10 while Metacritic sits at 64/100. Decent but not great scores.
More telling is that reactions have been strong with terms like 'disappointment' and 'awe-inspiring' being thrown about. There's a lot of love for the more "Star Trek: Next Gen"-style epic sci-fi drama of the first half with its bigger questions of creation and a great turn by Michael Fassbender. The second and more "Alien"-esque horror-oriented half is frequently being labelled a mess in spite of one sequence (the disturbing surgery scene) being highly praised.
Debates are set to rage as to what worked, what didn't, who is to praise and who is to blame for the end result. Would it have been a better film had it ditched any of its "Alien" connections, or should it have gone the other way and been a straight up prequel?
Did many of the issues that plagued the ending of "Lost" (answering questions only with questions, unsatisfying character arcs) show up in Damon Lindelof's script for this? Did Scott's desire to leave room for sequels compromise giving this the satisfying ending it deserved, or do you prefer the ambiguous nature of what we see?
Please leave your comments below. Because this is a film that can't really be discussed without spoilers, you can talk about all the spoilers you like below including the ending. If you haven't seen the film yet and want to, do NOT ready any further down the page.