[Marxism] Prometheus: the Tea Party in Space
daniel.lindvall at filmint.nu
Tue Jun 19 06:41:05 MDT 2012
That would all be very "Lost" and perhaps this is how it will all be explained in "Prometheus 0: The Prequel". But looking at the film we have so far it's a rather far-fetched idea. The conflict between David the Android and Charlize Theron as the ship's commander is presented clearly as being the "patriarchal" conflict between the real child who is "only" a daughter and the android who is "almost a son".
As for the android infecting the male hero of the film, the scientist Holloway, he does so when Holloway is in a miserable state believing the whole project, his life-work, is a failure. David then asks what he would do or sacrifice to know the truth and Holloway answers that he'd do anything or give up anything. Only then does David apparently decide to infect Holloway. It seems as if David is trying to make his own moral judgment here, rather than simply follow orders. Doing so he tries to understand human thinking but of course fails completely as a real human would understand that a sober Holloway having slept on it would probably think differently and that anyway he probably doesn't really mean what he is saying literally even at the time. "The villain" here seems to be David's built-in drive for knowledge at almost, though not quit, hence the interrogation, any price.
19 jun 2012 kl. 14:09 skrev Daniel Rocha:
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> I was reading some discussions and it seems that old CEO old took as humans
> the couple of scientists and those guys who were left behind. All others
> were robots.
> For example, remember, the old man in the hologram said that David, the
> robot, was the closest thing he had as a son. Later in the movie, the
> executive woman called him farther. Also, she was strong enough to fight
> David. So, she was a robot too. Probably the guys who sacrificed themselves
> were also robots, with fake memories, and sacrificed themselves because
> they were programmed to do that.
> The humans in the mission were only there to be experimented as guinea
> pigs. For example, the old CEO explicitly ordered David to contaminate him
> with the black goo. That's pretty much like the 1st Alien, except that in
> this they were used as guinea pigs to a biological weapon.
> 2012/6/19 Daniel Lindvall <daniel.lindvall at filmint.nu>
>> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
>>> The villain in this movie is ,*exactly like the Alien
>>> movies*, some big ass corporation (read: "rich folks"), not the
>> I don't think the corporation is presented as that much of a villain here.
>> Even if the CEO guy is looking for eternal life for himself, he hasn't
>> really manipulated anyone into the expedition, which seems motivated almost
>> entirely by "pure" scientific desire for knowledge. Also, there is, unlike
>> in the first Alien, no working class characters here arguing that they want
>> to get home and get paid and aren't paid enough to take risks exploring
>> space. The working class has been replaced by technology it would seem.
>> What we DO have is a scientist with working class cultural attributes
>> (broad accent, tattoos, punk hair cut) who is the first one to want to back
>> out and is only here for the pay. So it all looks a bit like the postmodern
>> drivel about a knowledge society with two kinds of people distinguished by
>> personality type rather than class, those who are driven by material needs
>> (and therefore achieve less and are poorer) and those who are driven by a
>> thirst for knowledge.
>>> While there is this "Darwain was wrong" alien 'seeding' thing is hardly
>>> Christian myth and is *hated* by the Christian Right. They will likely
>>> hate this movie too. Perhaps the reviewer and the Tea Party can start
>>> a video watching club and throw pop-corn at the screen.
>> The American Christian Right probably will hate it. But the cross Rapace
>> is wearing is featured time and again, as is the idea that if there are
>> Engineers then someone must have created the Engineers, ie God. And there's
>> the outspoken enthusiasm about proving evolution wrong.
>>> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
>>> Set your options at:
>> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
>> Set your options at:
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldiniz at gmail.com
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/daniel.lindvall%40filmint.nu
More information about the Marxism