Ridley Scott, Prometheus

From: Abrams, J.J.
Sent: Tuesday June 05, 2012 4:06 PM
To: Lindelof, Damon
Subject: DUDE!

Umm, did you read this fucking piece?
http://www.movies.com/movie-news/ridley-scott-prometheus-interview/8232 You might wanna tell your boy to keep a lid on shit.
- JJ

We realize that this interview is a little old -- but we're just catching up to it -- and at any rate, it seems everyone wants to keep talking about "Prometheus," most of all Ridley Scott. Before we continue we should say there will be spoilers in case you haven't seen the film yet, so no whining if you read past this point and the movie is ruined for you.

So, depending on which side of the fence you're sitting on, "Prometheus" either explained too much or didn't explain enough, but either way, the film introduced some grand ideas about creation, religion and where humanity fits in the scope of the vast universe of the film. There have been two big question marks about the film: what's the deal with the strange opening sequence in which an Engineer drinks a mystery cup of tea (or whatever) and subsequently disintegrates? And secondly, what did humanity do to cause our creators to want to destroy to us? While this has led to many interesting theories and debates, Ridley Scott has gone ahead and ruined them for you, and as a result, taken some of the shine off "Prometheus" in the process.

So first, let's get to that opening scene. "...[the] sequence at the beginning of the film that is fundamentally creation. It’s a donation, in the sense that the weight and the construction of the DNA of those aliens is way beyond what we can possibly imagine," Scott said. Adding that the planet isn't necessarily Earth, he says, "No, it doesn't have to be. That could be anywhere. That could be a planet anywhere. All he’s doing is acting as a gardener in space. And the plant life, in fact, is the disintegration of himself. If you parallel that idea with other sacrificial elements in history – which are clearly illustrated with the Mayans and the Incas – he would live for one year as a prince, and at the end of that year, he would be taken and donated to the gods in hopes of improving what might happen next year, be it with crops or weather, et cetera."

With that bit now nice and explained, let's get to the bigger question -- what did we do to make God/our creators angry? Well, if you theorized that it was because we crucified Jesus, you win! Confirming that at one point the script explicitly spelled this out, Scott says that was the direction they were taking with the story -- at least at first. "We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose," he admits. "But if you look at it as an 'our children are misbehaving down there' scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, 'Let’s send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it.' Guess what? They crucified him."