My Book Blog's Review of Prometheus

I meant to get around to this a lot sooner, I apologize, sincerely, for the poor timing, but unforeseen events/emergencies have forced me to delay this post I so desperately wished to write.

It is, if you have been following me on the Twitbooks ,about the one thing I cannot stop talking about of late, the film Prometheus. This is a film that has garnered much attention and much hate from nerds, casual science fiction fans, regular movie-goers and unintelligent, uninformed action film fans alike. Oh and atheists, they especially hate this film. There is something inherently wrong to them about people believing in God and the existence of aliens at the same time. I personally think it is the existence of God bit that winds them up but the primary atheist I talk to does not actually have a problem with what I just mentioned, because he has a brain that is useful.

Anyway, this film, this fucking film! if you will, really has not been well received. People just are not talking about it in a very positive light. And it makes me wonder what things people were saying about Alien in 1979. All I know about that one is from my father, who says it was “freaky.” Prometheus, a great prequel when you consider how many even-remotely-decent-prequels there are out there, is not necessarily freaky. Nor is it entirely intended to be. Whilst Alien was a groundbreaking, revolutionary horror/sci-fi crossover, combining elements of each in such a way that viewers were never really sure which it was supposed to be (hint: horror), Prometheus is more sci-fi adventure but keeps some of that chest-bursting charm we have come to admire from Ridley Scott.

I know, I know, it has a terribly convenient setup and we are whisked away to a foreign planet before we can even judge for ourselves whether or not we want to sit through this whole adventure. And I know, the characters are sometimes weak, with ambitions that do not line up with the policies onboard the ship and hence the trouble, and some characters, especially the old ones, are entirely unnecessary whilst still others are completely necessary and great but are killed off in a very weak and silly fashion.

But there is more to the movie, especially to a person in the field of science who has had interactions with many different fields, that stands out. The Geologist was perfect, ditto for the biologist. Has anyone ever been a part of a job with a geologist? That role was cast perfectly. Almost made me feel as if Ridley Scott came to my worksite sometime in the past when I was not there. And his relationship with the biologist – absolutely spot on. The scientists I know and have known in the past clash with geologists, and the rock-folk seem all to quick to defend themselves against the fact that their field is a speculative science, not an actual science. Just as engineers are applied sciences. One thing they hold dear is that biology is not an exact science and should not be looked at as such. I personally love the conflicts between these careers, and being in a work environment for NASA’s Phoenix mission and my current job affords me all of the tension I can handle with varying fields of science using their careers to shield themselves from actually needing to make friends. This is reflected beautifully in the film.

I am not sure if this was by accident in the movie, or if Scott knew what he was doing, but based on the evidence of Alien and his accuracy of depicting the brotherhood-conscious and money/security-conscious yet production/safety-oblivious  union miners in characters Parker, Lambert and Brett (something I am unfortunately all too familiar with), I think he knew exactly what he was doing with these characters, no matter how small their role.

Then there is the Alien influence. The part that makes it either a prequel or an addition to what is my favourite science fiction film franchise. As a man who enjoys and appreciates the story of Alien 3, I can definitely appreciate the tie-ins from Prometheus to the franchise. I squirmed when I saw the life forms for the first time. Shitty exploration scientists do not seem to catch on, but aliens from Ridley Scott films are almost painfully obviously fallic and usually are successful in raping male characters’ mouths. Of course, we know by now what they’re doing, and much like Ellen Ripley we never seem to get over the dread of watching them burst out of someone’s chest,  and like her, we cannot seem to look away.

And when you need a hero, no one seems to step up quite like strong, logical and independent women. They seem to make better engineers in my field and I would not be surprised if they actually make better leaders under pressure. But it is controversial, and uncomfortable for men to accept this. That is another reason I love Ridley Scott, he shoves that shit in our faces. Women are also less fidgety and uncomfortable when something is living inside someone, they have to be, that is just a part of nature, but for us men, holy shit Scott knows how to make us squirm in our seats.

All these reasons and more helped me enjoy Prometheus, and I was not one who was a bit turned off by the fact that a belief in God and the existence of aliens can coexist. They can. Christianity might have to change some of their sermons, if we are all to accept this, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with the premise. God, teachings, Christianity, these are things that are (or at least should be) about values. Atheists need not get angry that there is a contradiction here, but be happy that a Christian – a type of person most atheists find hard-headed – can accept this coexistence and back it up with a simple statement of “because it is what I believe.” That’s not being too pushy, that is totally fair and I will allow anyone of any creed to tell me that, absolutely no questions asked on my part.

Each and every one of the persons that sees this film is entitled to his or her own opinion of it, and need not justify that opinion to me. But I have read and heard many sour, negative reviews and disfavourable opinions towards it. I say that there are a great many more terribly written movies with bigger plot holes and worse plot-lines altoghter that have received much more acclaim in recent memory (Avatar, Transformers &cetera). Sure, that is no excuse for a disappointing film to rely upon; and sure, it may have its contradictions, its loose ends, its redundant characters, some of which are poorly casted and their silly reasoning for existing in the first place that fails to fully engage viewers in the expedition, but it is a very unique idea for a film, along with a very challenging idea, and opens up to another chapter yet to be discovered, capped off by brilliant special effects. And that unto itself is more than most films have to offer in the modern era. And that is truly all I can expect from a good film anymore, good ideas with passing storylines and great, but not sensory-overloading, special effects. Also, if you are a true film snob artsy person like some people I know, and enjoy solid acting and well-timed music, then Prometheus offers that as well, just not throughout every character like I had hoped it would.

2001: A Space Odyssey

Author’s Note: the novel, not the movie

Which is worth noting, as for whatever reason Arthur C. Clarke decided to do both, virtually at the same time. Although I can think of better things to do two of at the same time, he felt that the story needed proper explaining, specifically the Star Gate and the alien intervention, whereas Stanley Kubrick felt that the movie should be mysterious, enigmatic, and move the viewer into a gripping sense of wonder. I like Arthur C. Clarke’s decision more; books are just better and you can draw ultimately the same conclusions with two very different tactics but visually, especially visually as of 1968, I feel like you lose some emotional and psychological unseen aspects that films cannot offer.

That being said, Clarke wrote a very good but not great story, in my humble opinion. I love science, I love space and I love fiction. Anything with space exploration, space treachery, novel concepts of galactic travel, self-aware computers, bizarre ends to interaction with hyper-intelligent creatures and so on, I am all for it.

In fact, I loved just about everything in this book. The symmetry between Moon-Watcher and the Star Child, inheriting powers from the aliens that help shape humanity at the beginning and end of the book, 3 million years apart; great stuff. The will and drive of the cosmonauts to further space exploration knowing their chances of success were terrifyingly low but would stop at nothing to complete the mission; awesome. Even the little things about how physics works differently for them, and with the confinement of the ship and the peril of being alone at the edge of our solar system mounting, their brains are still so well suited that they can work through conflict and keep you interested in their quest to reach Saturn.

I would like to say the only negative of the book was the same thing that usually gets me involved in sci-fi books: aliens. Maybe it is the fault of the creators of the television show Ancient Aliens, but anytime one tries to link humanity’s early advancements with alien intervention (e.g. The Great Pyramids; the Nazca Lines; Stonehenge) there are often silly jokes or strange looks given in response rather than intelligent conversation being sparked. So yeah, alien assistance to shape us the way we are is met with ridicule because it is fairly silly. But Clarke and Kubrick made a really good story about it. And that is not at all what bothers me about this book.

It is really HAL 9000. I guess I have read too much of Robert Heinlein’s self-aware computers (The Moon is a Harsh Mistress with MIKE/MICHELLE/Adam Selene or Time Enough for Love with Dora and Minerva) or droids in stories like The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. But for some reason I simply could not go from a semi-advanced human race in the not-to-distant-future, which 2001 presents to us, to a race with computers that have emotions, feelings, show enthusiasm about completing a mission and ultimately kill humans in the process but with some guilt along the way. They do not fit into the same era, for me.

Okay, I get it, there are self-aware computers in this universe. Good, nothing new for me. But why? How? And if we are newly gaining the ability to travel beyond Mars, and newly gaining the ability to have a supercomputer, then give us some insight as to how it came to get a personality.

In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, for example, MIKE’s personality is gained quite by accident as it makes a computer’s attempt at a joke. Far out, yes, but that’s Heinlein. It is also an error, as in, not supposed to happen and a complete mistake in the computer. In Time Enough for Love, Dora and Minerva are given their personalities, Dora by Lazarus Long in an attempt to remind him of the mortal girl he once loved since she was a child. Sure, it’s sweet, but it is also a design feature.

HAL 9000 just is. And that was a noticeable gap for me that I tried to overcome and enjoy the story, which I did, but just cannot give it credit for being great. The hole that represents HAL 9000 aside, though, everything else is really enjoyable. Even aliens helping us evolve into what we have become (ideas that have since been humiliated by Ancient Aliens. Thanks a fucking lot Ancient Aliens). Going to watch the movie soon, maybe I will let you know how I feel about it. I can already tell you now though that Stanley Kubrick creeps me the fuck out.

A Clockwork Orange

If you can manage sitting through the awful narration, that is to say Nadsat and all the horrors it brings on sentence structure and half-translations of sentences, then it’s a good book. I compare it to watching a movie in which the camera work is total shit and shakey, like Cloverfield or Quantum of Solace or something really nauseating (I think of this analogy because I recently viewed The Hunger Games and nearly vomited during the entire 2 hours of shit cinematography). Once you are past all that, it is really a good book, very moving and insightful.

Children are assholes, we all know this because we were all children once. But the kids in this book are fierce, terrifying and absolutely out of control. As if I was not put off enough when he destroys a man’s books in the early going, they also assault him and leave him bleeding and crawling, only to move on in the evening and commit a very horrible rape crime that is worked out in details that are not too vivid, and so less violent and disturbing at face value, but almost more horrible because the narrator and perpetrator, Alex, skims along the act and leaves a lot out and it sort of gives you the idea he isn’t all that bothered by it. As though he needs not focus too much on the act because it just is not that big a deal to him. Really terrible.

He moves on to committing a few too many senseless crimes and is later imprisoned for them. Rightfully so. Good, we can all inhale deeply and take solace in the fact that the justice system is doing its work and bad people are punished, learn their lesson and life is good, right?

Alex begins to lose his identity in prison, beginning with losing his name and being referred to only as 655321 during his stay. Sometimes criminals get out on good behavior, but Alex chooses to get out early via the Ludovico Technique, a controversial brain-conditioning program that will reset his behaviours to fearing, terribly, any act of violence or cruelty. His chaplain, whom he is closest too, warns him of the dangers of losing his free will and all ability to choose the proper path, but he ignores it. And just before his procedure, he commits one final act of superior violence by killing the new inmate that is stirring up trouble with the four of them living in their cell.

Alex is released to find himself in a struggle. His family has moved on and so have his old droogs. Though he would like to move on as well, he is still recognized as a menace and not given the chance he was promised to fit into society. One of his old droogs and a former rival are now members of the police and use their power to intimidate, beat and ultimately, rape him. He’s rescued by the man he once met and knows only by two facts: (1) that he is the man who writing A Clockwork Orange when Alex broke into his house and (2) he is the man whose wife Alex and the gang raped. He learns that she committed suicide sometime after that and Alex finds himself as a martyr for a cause that is trying to bring down the oppressive government regime that is responsible for this society being in its current state.

The pressures of it all plus some bad side effects to Alex’s conditioning, brain washing really, force him to attempt suicide and the near-death experience resets his brain and undoes all the washing. So the violent sociopath is back and really gets his way again. In the final chapter – omitted from the early US publication and therefore omitted from the Stanley Kubrick’s film – Alex realizes that he will eventually have a baby and it will grow up to be as big a piece of shit as him, and he will be as powerless to stop it as his parents were to stop him, and so on for generations. I have heard why it was omitted, that many readers would falsely interpret a happy ending, but it really does belong in there. It gives you a sense of how difficult it is to change the culture of a violent group in any society.

So the original British version had a much better ending for me, but the entire book leaves you with a kick in the chest as to how shitty crime evolves amongst misled youth, gangs, gets treated in the prison system and in the end, reproduces. Very desperate feeling to it after it is all over and I dig that.

Lastly, for a little story on how the book was written, check these strange facts out that I found on Tor.com (a favourite website for sci-fi/fantasy nerds everywhere).

A Clockwork Orange – Brave Weird World