Prometheus is an entertaining and thrilling Ridley Scott feature in the vein of Alien (1979). Indeed, it's so similar to Alien that it may or may not serve as a prequel. It's not sold as a prequel, though, since the film is good enough to stand on its own, and serves more as an updated retelling of the 1979 thriller with a few new twists and superb CG special effects. The 3D trend in recent years has been met with mixed reactions. In some films it works well, in others not so much. This film definitely lies in the former category. The 3D effects are excellent, and at least on par with 2010's Avatar.
But, ignoring the effects, how is the movie itself? Honestly there is nothing bad I can say about this movie except that a lot of it you've probably seen before. It follows the same formula as past Alien films. A ship full of people wake up from stasis, arrive on a planet, explore a bit too deeply, and wake up a sleeping monster that picks them off one at a time. Unlike Alien (1979), it's pretty easy to predict who will be the last one standing. It's not completely predictable though. There are a few surprises here and there, particularly towards the end, that will stand out in your mind. There are also some very memorable and tense scenes that you haven't seen anything like before. There's one claustrophobic scene, in particular, that really stands out as tense and horrifically cringe inducing, particularly if you've had surgery before. This scene is probably the best part of the movie, as I don't think anything like it has been done before. At least not done this well.
The film is more or less well written and well acted. The characters aren't particularly great, but they aren't bad either. The overall premise isn't particularly original, but there's enough new elements to keep it interesting. It's a competent film, but the biggest problem with it is that the story really didn't go far enough. While there weren't any noticeable plot-holes, I still felt that some things were missing. Perhaps they had planned more that never made it to the final cut. For example, Guy Pearce's character is a very old man. While the make-up job is good, It's not too difficult to tell that it's a young man in old man make-up. I had thought, the whole time, that we'd eventually see him as a young man at some point. We didn't, which led me to question the reason why they didn't just hire an old actor. Still, the ending left room for a sequel, so perhaps there's more to that story to come.
But the idea of the sequel brings up another point. If this is a prequel, than wouldn't the original Alien film already be a sequel. Is this film a prequel, reboot or standalone film? The answer is yes. It is all of those things. A standalone prequel may sound like an oxymoron but all it means is that it works as both a standalone movie and a prequel to the original 1979 film. This seems to be the trend in recent years. Instead of making full-on prequels like Star Wars, filmmakers prefer to avoid the baggage and go halfway between prequel/reboot or completely standalone movie. X-Men First Class, Star Trek and Rise of the Planet of the Apes are examples of this. This trend started with video games, in particular the constant string Zelda prequels/reboots dating back to 1991's A Link to the Past. It allows the writers to expand a franchise without having to be limited by the continuity of that franchise. They also have the benefit of drawing in fans of the franchise and attracting a new audience that may or may not have seen the older films. In essence, it's like having your cake and eating it too. The downside to this approach is that it makes the actual canon of the franchise very subjective and ambiguous and causes all sorts of exhausting internet arguments among the continuity nerds.
Overall I give it an 7/10 and recommend it to people who are fans of the horror/thriller/slasher/science fiction genres. It's got a good amount of gore, so don't take small children. And, if you like 3D, see it in 3D, this one's worth the extra few bucks. Just don't expect anything ground breaking.
But, ignoring the effects, how is the movie itself? Honestly there is nothing bad I can say about this movie except that a lot of it you've probably seen before. It follows the same formula as past Alien films. A ship full of people wake up from stasis, arrive on a planet, explore a bit too deeply, and wake up a sleeping monster that picks them off one at a time. Unlike Alien (1979), it's pretty easy to predict who will be the last one standing. It's not completely predictable though. There are a few surprises here and there, particularly towards the end, that will stand out in your mind. There are also some very memorable and tense scenes that you haven't seen anything like before. There's one claustrophobic scene, in particular, that really stands out as tense and horrifically cringe inducing, particularly if you've had surgery before. This scene is probably the best part of the movie, as I don't think anything like it has been done before. At least not done this well.
The film is more or less well written and well acted. The characters aren't particularly great, but they aren't bad either. The overall premise isn't particularly original, but there's enough new elements to keep it interesting. It's a competent film, but the biggest problem with it is that the story really didn't go far enough. While there weren't any noticeable plot-holes, I still felt that some things were missing. Perhaps they had planned more that never made it to the final cut. For example, Guy Pearce's character is a very old man. While the make-up job is good, It's not too difficult to tell that it's a young man in old man make-up. I had thought, the whole time, that we'd eventually see him as a young man at some point. We didn't, which led me to question the reason why they didn't just hire an old actor. Still, the ending left room for a sequel, so perhaps there's more to that story to come.
But the idea of the sequel brings up another point. If this is a prequel, than wouldn't the original Alien film already be a sequel. Is this film a prequel, reboot or standalone film? The answer is yes. It is all of those things. A standalone prequel may sound like an oxymoron but all it means is that it works as both a standalone movie and a prequel to the original 1979 film. This seems to be the trend in recent years. Instead of making full-on prequels like Star Wars, filmmakers prefer to avoid the baggage and go halfway between prequel/reboot or completely standalone movie. X-Men First Class, Star Trek and Rise of the Planet of the Apes are examples of this. This trend started with video games, in particular the constant string Zelda prequels/reboots dating back to 1991's A Link to the Past. It allows the writers to expand a franchise without having to be limited by the continuity of that franchise. They also have the benefit of drawing in fans of the franchise and attracting a new audience that may or may not have seen the older films. In essence, it's like having your cake and eating it too. The downside to this approach is that it makes the actual canon of the franchise very subjective and ambiguous and causes all sorts of exhausting internet arguments among the continuity nerds.
Overall I give it an 7/10 and recommend it to people who are fans of the horror/thriller/slasher/science fiction genres. It's got a good amount of gore, so don't take small children. And, if you like 3D, see it in 3D, this one's worth the extra few bucks. Just don't expect anything ground breaking.