Cinema Discourse

  • Home
  • About
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy

John Lobell – John David Ebert

Movies as Theoretical Narratives


Cinema discourse looks at current and classic movies from a literary point of view. We also have top movie reviews, current movie reviews, film ratings, movie blogs and movie history.
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / More thoughts on Prometheus

More thoughts on Prometheus

July 26, 2012 By John Lobell Leave a Comment

by John Lobell

An expedition goes to a remote planet where there was an outpost of beings from another world called the Engineers. The members of the expedition piece together that the Engineers had created life on earth, and that those on this outpost had created a vicious bio-weapon (the aliens of the Alien movies) for the purpose of destroying human life on earth, but their bio-weapon got out of control and killed the Engineers on the outpost. The movie ends with the emergence of the first of the aliens that we saw in the older movies, and with our sole-surviving intrepid female expeditioner taking off for the Engineers’ home plant to solve the mystery of why they created us and why they want to destroy is. Both of which we will presumably find out in the sequels to come.

What to make of all of this? And, why we will take Alien over Prometheus as the more philosophically mature movie.

The first thing we should note is that Prometheus takes itself seriously as evoking mythological depths. First, the title, from the Titan who brought to humanity not only fire, but technology and the arts. Then references to movies with mythic dimensions. 2001, with hints of assisted evolution and artificial intelligence in HAL. Blade Runner with a shared director and androids. Alien, with a shared director, and for which Prometheus is a prequel. And finally H. R. Giger, who did designs for the Alien movies and for Prometheus, and whose work evokes a futurist bio-machine eroticism.

Not afraid of pretention, Ridley Scott, Prometheus’s director says, “we are talking about gods and engineers. Engineers of space.”

So, just what is the mythic theme of Prometheus?

Joseph Campbell describes two views of creation. In the Middle East, the view is that the earth is dead and spirit comes from without. From Genesis 2:7: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

In the East, the notion is that humans are natural creatures, and spirit is in all things. Thus spirit does not come from without, but is an integral part of both humans and nature.

This second view of creation provides far less material for a dramatic filmic plot line; something like the special effects in the movie, The Tree of Life—visually spectacular, from single cell organisms to dinosaurs and all, but little dramatic tension.

The first view of creation, which sees it coming from outside is, of course, rich with dramatic possibility, the possibility of our meeting up with the outside existence that created us.

The most powerful expression of this is in 2001: A Space Odyssey. It is the intervention of an outside existence in the form of the monolith that transforms one tribe of pre-humans into symbolic creatures, capable of realizing the potential of a bone as a weapon, which, on being tossed into the air, arcs into a satellite in orbit. A brilliant image evoking a thousand page thesis on the origins of technology. And it is another encounter with that outside existence with transforms Bowman into the space child, the next stage of human existence.

So 2001 sees us as becoming human as a result of outside intervention, but remains vague about the nature of the outsiders. A good dramatic move.

Prometheus, on the other hand, is more explicit about the outsiders. The motivations of the outsiders, called the Engineers, is unknown, sure to be revealed in the sequels, but we are shown what they did.

The Engineers send a representative to a primitive earth devoid of life. His body breaks up, spilling his organic matter and his DNA into the water, thus beginning the development of life that leads to us. And, after billions of years of evolution, our DNA comes together the same as that of the Engineers.

Prometheus is in a long line of movies that see either life on earth, or human consciousness, or civilization as coming from without. Star Gate is an example, in which a proto-Egyptian alien race brought civilization to the earth. As I say above, there is a lot more dramatic potential in this scenario than in one in which we do it all on our own.

Ridley Scott is explicit about this notion of outside influence, referring to the work of Erich von Däniken who, in Chariots of the Gods? suggests that ancient astronauts directed the building of the Pyramids and other ancient monuments. Scott says, “NASA and the Vatican agree that [it is] almost mathematically impossible that we can be where we are today without there being a little help along the way… That’s what we’re looking at [in the film], at some of Erich von Däniken’s ideas of how did we humans come about.”

To avoid becoming intemperate, let me just say that I cannot overstate how, shall we say, annoying I and many others who study ancient civilizations find von Däniken. It is bigotry to say that ancient people were not capable of building pyramids, and, when we get closer to today, we have ample documents of the day-to-day work of the building of such monuments as St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome. With no mention of space aliens.

But there is something else.

As capricious as the Engineers are, it is probably comforting to some to know why we are here—something created us—and what will become of us—our creators have a plan.

The alternative to creation from the outside is… it’s just us. We are here alone. We alone have brought ourselves to where we are, we alone have to make sense of our existence in the grand sense, and of our individual lives. And we alone have to create what we are going to do and going to become next. Too scary for many. And a lot more difficult as a basis for drama.

(Added August 19, 2012)

We should make one more observation. The original Alien movie was really scary, not only as a science fiction horror movie, but also in a very philosophical way.

There is a wasp the stings and paralyzes a tarantula. It then drags the tarantula into a hole, lays it eggs in the body of the tarantula, and covers over the hole. The juvenile wasps, as they grow, feed on the living tarantula. Truly horrible. But if you think about it, this scenario is not uncommon. Life lives on life, a fact disguised but not changed when we buy meat in plastic wrap at the grocery store. Life is a horror show.

One of the great things about Alien was that it could be seen this way. The alien queen was not evil, just a “wasp” living out its normal life cycle, as we do when we grow and then eat chickens. It was this stark facing of reality that give Alien much of its power. Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley is not fighting evil, but uncaring nature which can be benign, but just as easily deadly. The alien queen is a force of nature, like a flood or a volcano.

But for many, this starkness it too much to take. They cannot accept that life is and must be this way. There must have been a mistake. The world was created good and pure. Everybody was a vegan. Then evil came into the world and screwed things up, and someday we will get rid of that evil and get back to purity. This dualistic approach originates in the Middle East. We see it in the Biblical religions, and it is highly explicit in Manichaeism, which sees a struggle between a good, spiritual world of light, and an evil, material world of darkness.

In his Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche has Zarathustra (another name for Zoroaster), who had originally taught this kind of dualism, return to say, in effect, “Look, I know I taught you that dualistic stuff, but that was when you were young and immature. Now it is time for you to grow up and see the world as it really is.” With that attitude, we will take Alien over Prometheus as the more philosophically mature movie.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

 

CLICK-FOR-CULTURAL-DISCOURSE

 

CLICK-FOR-VISIONARY-CREATIVITY

 

Contribute

 

Giant-Humans-Tiny-Worlds book cover

 

Post-Classic-Cinema-book
clickforpromovideo

 

Catastrophe book cover

 

newMedia-book

 

CELEBS-ICONS-book

 

Ebert books

Recent Posts

  • Animation Artistry in the Alps ~ by Larry Ruppel
  • Animated Cinematic Innovation Celebrated in the French Alps ~by Larry Ruppel
  • On Annihilation
  • On Blade Runner: 2049
  • On American Gods

Archives

Site

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Resources

  • Articles
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy
  • Data Access Request
  • Help Support John Ebert
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Being John Malkovich
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Inland Empire
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Lost Highway
  • John Lobell on Myths and Movies
  • Privacy Policy

John David Ebert Videos

click for video

Heidegger's Being and Time

click for video

Jean Gebser's Ever-Present Origin

click for video

Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

click for video

Fichte's Science of Knowledge

click for video

Schelling's First Outline of a System of the Philosophy of Nature

click for video

Karl Jaspers' Origin and Goal of History

click for video

Spengler's Decline of the West

click for video

Walter Benjamin's Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility

click for video

Derrida's Of Grammatology

click for video

Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment

click for video

Deleuze & Guattari's A Thousand Plateaus

click for video

Deleuze's Logic of Sense

click for video

Deleuze's Difference and Repetition

click for video

Vattimo's A Farewell to Truth

click for video

Alain Badiou's Ethics

click for video

The Works of Paul Virilio

click for video

Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres

click for video

John David Ebert on The Age of Catastrophe

click for video

John David Ebert on The New Media Invasion

click for video

John David Ebert on Elvis Presley

click for video

On Carroll Quigley and Historical Cycles

click for video

Heiner Muhlmann's Maximal Stress Cooperation Theory of Culture

click for video

On Borkenau's Cycle of the Dead

click for video

John David Ebert interviewed on Kubrick, Gilgamesh and the Dangers of Technology

click for video

John David Ebert Interviewed by the Artist Jacques de Beaufort

 

Click for John Lobell's Website

© 2014 John Lobell & John David Ebert | Webmaster jbQ Media Web & SEO

Manage Cookie Consent
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}