Prometheus rated O -

[7_Sorrows]

i have never visited the website that rates movies with an O - so i don’t know what that stands for. from the posts, i think it might be negative.

i saw Prometheus and i don’t see why you would have to confess to seeing it. i have been more offended by some of the lines on sitcoms in primetime to be honest.

Prometheus was just a good sci-fi movie. i wouldn’t give it an A by any means. there were problems with the some of the plot and dialogue. some good frightening moments though.

 

[Laughing_Crow]

Alright, pretty much most of this will be spoiler so if you want to see the movie dont read. Otherwise feel free to. Basic premise of the movie is the idea humanity was created not by a God but by a highly intelligent alien race. In this movie it opens up with one of the aliens ingesting some kind of liquid as he watches the others leave on the ship. He dies, his body disintegrating into the water, showing his dna break apart and spread out into the ocean that would create the first life forms of Earth. I would first like to point out this raises some questions about how the ‘engineers’ created life forms (did they all have to sacrifice someone to allow it to work?) and also raises a question about the alien itself. Prometheus was a titan who was punished for giving humanity knowledge of fire so they could stand equal with the gods, thus another questions comes up; was the alien that created life on earth ‘supposed’ to do it ie did the engineers decide to make humanity or was it only one who did it without consent?

I will say my favorite character in this was David the android (portrayed by Michael Fassbender who played Magneto in the latest X-men movie). One of the best parts is him asking a drunken Charlie why did he think humans created David who is synthetic, to which Charlie replies “cause we could”. David responds with “How disappointing would it be to hear the same from your creators?”. I like it because the whole point of the Prometheus journey was to find answers to lifes questions, and puts forth the possibility there is no great answer.

I do feel that though Noomi Rapace as Elizabeth Shaw portrayed Shaw well, and in keeping with alien made the main hero not some super military man but a heroine who comes to the task of facing an overwhelming force (ie Ripley) I feel her ‘faith’ was poorly done. She believes she was created by aliens but carries a cross. When Charlie asks if she is going to throw her cross away her answer to Charlies “we weren’t created by a God” is her answering “Who created the engineers”. I feel it was rather a weak argument and that it would have worked better if another character was portrayed as religious rather then her.

As for why the Engineers suddenly decided to kill off the humans with the bioweapons (AKA the nucleus for the Xenomorphs) it was revealed a possible reason that was cut from the story was the idea Jesus was an Engineer who came down to Earth. They scraped it nearly instantly as the creator felt it was to obvious, over used and would alienate a great deal of the audience. Also the movie would lose some of its appeal with such a cheap ‘answer’ and better to leave the reasons unknown.

 

[edwest2]

It is important to note that the rating assigned to a film by the Catholic News Service (and before it, the USCCB Film Office)** is the opinion of a layperson**. It is therefore about as far from an infallible judgment as you can get.

Hopefully, the reviewer gives a thoughtful analysis based on Catholic moral teaching which leads to his rating. The reviewer’s cautions should be given careful consideration - and if anything he mentions is something that could tempt you to sin, then you should probably avoid the movie in question.

Catholic film critic Steven Greydanus of Decent Films has disagreed with the USCCB/CNS ratings before. On his site, he gives positive reviews to at least 2 films which received Os from the USCCB – the first Matrix film, and Terminator 3. And he is not known for being lax.

Are you just looking for an excuse? Honestly. I love Sci-Fi movies but the brilliant Terminator 2 was marred by all the profanity. I would like to see a version where it’s all taken out.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Here’s a review from Forbes. WARNING *** BIG SPOILER ALERTS***

forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2012/06/11/review-prometheus-is-a-visually-stunning-epic-failure/

And based on what was written, I don’t care who wrote the film. Here’s how it works. The director gets the script and the potential actors get the script. If anybody doesn’t like it, they decline. Before the first set is built, the entire film is storyboarded - all the scenes are laid out like in a comic book. That way, if the producer looks at a particular scene, he could say, “Nope. The Effects people tell me that particular scene is going to put us at least 2 to 5 million over budget. Come up with something else or something less elaborate.”

And the director. If I was in Mr. Scott’s shoes, I don’t think I would have wanted the characters I was directing to behave the way they did, in a scientific sense.

Peace,
Ed

 

[losh14]

Whiting out the spoilers …

Alright, pretty much most of this will be spoiler so if you want to see the movie dont read. Otherwise feel free to. Basic premise of the movie is the idea humanity was created not by a God but by a highly intelligent alien race.

That’s the initial idea, and the cult that surrounds this event - somehow - is the motivator for the exploration in the first place on the titular ship.

Prometheus was a titan who was punished for giving humanity knowledge of fire so they could stand equal with the gods, thus another questions comes up; was the alien that created life on earth ‘supposed’ to do it ie did the engineers decide to make humanity or was it only one who did it without consent?

I thought this could be a really interesting point of discussion - and whether there was some kind of galactic war going on because of it.

I do feel that though Noomi Rapace as Elizabeth Shaw portrayed Shaw well… I feel her ‘faith’ was poorly done. She believes she was created by aliens but carries a cross. When Charlie asks if she is going to throw her cross away her answer to Charlies “we weren’t created by a God” is her answering “Who created the engineers”.

As for why the Engineers suddenly decided to kill off the humans with the bioweapons (AKA the nucleus for the Xenomorphs) it was revealed a possible reason that was cut from the story was the idea Jesus was an Engineer who came down to Earth.

I agree, the movie would have gone from mysterious to kitschy in seconds. I think leaving so much mystery ultimately serves the horror theme better - simply put, there are no answers. What could be more horrifying to someone of faith?

 

[colliric]

I agree, the movie would have gone from mysterious to kitschy in seconds. I think leaving so much mystery ultimately serves the horror theme better - simply put, there are no answers. What could be more horrifying to someone of faith?

A more appropriate and blunt explination is that they realised we were dumb/sinful enough to eventually invent the H-Bomb and then later invent spaceflight capibilities too… And they didn’t exactly want to kill us, but rather the “temple” was a safety precaution against us venturing out too far from home(As it seemed to have an automatic response system).

It actually dovetails beautifully with the Book of Genesis and our partaking in death, or the knowledge of good and evil.

I guess this also fits well with the cheesy idea that Christ would have been “an engineer” sent to save what goodness was left.

 

[colliric]

Are you just looking for an excuse? Honestly. I love Sci-Fi movies but the brilliant Terminator 2 was marred by all the profanity. I would like to see a version where it’s all taken out.

Peace,
Ed

The extended edition is a fantastic film and explains some of the plot holes in the theatrical cut.

Especially the scene where they revealed that the T800 had a learning setting that stops it from becoming fully functional A.I. That was much better explained than tbe Theatrical version, which just seemed to suggest he didn’t really bother learning new things or bother questioning his missions, despite having the capability of self-determination.

Plus that was Linda Hamilton’s best scene in the film… I love how the T-800 wakes up without realising what happened during the downtime.

 

[sidetrack]

As the sci-fi genre goes I take it as thought exercises - gedenken, so to speak, so that whenever I read or watch sci-fi, I know that it’s not going to reflect authentic spiritual realities. My expectation is that if there’s a morality present, I don’t expect it to be my own, and so I take the story for whatever entertainment value it has but leave it otherwise.

Reading the review, there’s lots of offensive material in Prometheus, but I’m not surprised. The franchise** is bleak and nihilistic, and much of the story is meant to illustrate man’s insignificance**. It’s quite a step from our belief that we are created in the Image and Likeness of God. If that’s a challenge for you, don’t see it. It personally doesn’t bother me, but my faith in Christ is solid here, and I believe our origin and our end is in Him. I don’t entertain seriously any notion that some alien race created us and abandoned us.

Everyone should keep in mind that the inspirations for the “Alien” franchise are slightly Lovecraftian so no surprise for the presence of such themes.The whole “ancient astronauts seeding life across planets” trope doesn’t bug me.I’ve seen it done with more faux religious symbolism.In this case I’m thinking about the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion.See the backstory on the the “Angels” (destructive quasi-organic robot like beings in this case) is that there the offspring a being “Adam” who’s sometimes also classified as an Angel and Lilith who’s named after a Babylonian demon in Jewish lore and they were made by the clever in an acronym “first ancestral race” (.F.A.R.) which is comparable to the Firstborns who made the Monoliths in the Space Odysesy books.

The main character gets pregnant with an alien and gets a c-section by a surgery machine to get it cut out.

uch: Frankly that’s the only part that bugs me.I’m heard described in two other review vids as more like an abortion with the latter reviewer saying (much to my dismay) that (paraphrasing) “it’ll go down in history as one of the most iconic sci-fi film moments”.Seeing as how these are .H.R. Giger made creatures I’m not surprised.I mean dang,I know the reason behind the design of the xenomorphs and the reasons for the two mouths and I’ll tell you right now it’s certianly NFSW.I’m just so revolted by how this.I mean the what the xenomorph did the pregnant woman in AVP:Reqium was enuff to make me leap off the couch and stop watching but actually hope that on the DVD release Ridley Scott will give offical statement that it was a C-section and NOT (for the love of Heaven,please say it ain’t so) an abortion or else this will raise some pretty uncomfortable moral questions on this issue particulary regarding it’s depiction in media (good grief just thinking those words makes my stomach turn)…[need “brain bleach”]

 

[colliric]

uch: Frankly that’s the only part that bugs me.I’m heard described in two other review vids as more like an abortion with the latter reviewer saying (much to my dismay) that (paraphrasing) “it’ll go down in history as one of the most iconic sci-fi film moments”.Seeing as how these are .H.R. Giger made creatures I’m not surprised.I mean dang,I know the reason behind the design of the xenomorphs and the reasons for the two mouths and I’ll tell you right now it’s certianly NFSW.I’m just so revolted by how this.I mean the what the xenomorph did the pregnant woman in AVP:Reqium was enuff to make me leap off the couch and stop watching but actually hope that on the DVD release Ridley Scott will give offical statement that it was a C-section and NOT (for the love of Heaven,please say it ain’t so) an abortion or else this will raise some pretty uncomfortable moral questions on this issue particulary regarding it’s depiction in media (good grief just thinking those words makes my stomach turn)…[need “brain bleach”]

I don’t like the scene myself as it’s delibratly disturbing(just like the John Hurt “chestbuster” scene in the original film), but the distinction here must be made:

She is “aborting” an alien species, as she is 100% aware of what has happened. It’s not a human abortion. And appropriately it’s portrayed as a bloody and horrifying proceedure anyway.

Technically however it was in fact a self-performed C-section.

 

[edwest2]

The extended edition is a fantastic film and explains some of the plot holes in the theatrical cut.

Especially the scene where they revealed that the T800 had a learning setting that stops it from becoming fully functional A.I. That was much better explained than tbe Theatrical version, which just seemed to suggest he didn’t really bother learning new things or bother questioning his missions, despite having the capability of self-determination.

Plus that was Linda Hamilton’s best scene in the film… I love how the T-800 wakes up without realising what happened during the downtime.

Well, that may be fine and good, but I’ve grown tired of the “profanity is no big deal”
idea. God willing, I’ll be writing more SF, minus the profanity.

On another front, the T800 does state that it was reprogrammed, which suggests a working, practical knowledge of how to do that. Which implies a knowledge of its full range of function. You take the head of an otherwise destroyed Terminator and reverse engineer it, including getting an understanding of what its capabilities are.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Hi,
I went to the Catholic Movie Review site and found it was rated O. Are you going to see it and if so, would you confess it? I love horror movies, many of which are O rated, and I always confess it, but the priest called this “venial in nature.” What do you think?
Thanks so much
maryann

The website that does Catholic movie reviews is in no way binding. Use their ratings or don’t, as you prefer.

I have seen Prometheus and thought it was great. I don’t think you need to confess seeing a movie like Prometheus. Yes, horrific things happen in the film, but they’re portrayed as horrific, not commendable. And its themes are very positive and thought-provoking.

I can’t comment on what your priest told you, since he probably knows your situation way better than I could.

But generally, no, seeing a film like Prometheus is not sinful at all.

He used “venial in nature” for all my sins that were confessed including O films.
Another priest just said for me (maybe because I’m scrupulous) “it’s never a mortal sin.”

Ah, I see. If he didn’t say it about watching “O” films specifically, then I’m guessing he didn’t mean to imply that doing so is venially sinful.

Besides, it doesn’t matter that the Catholic News Service rates it “O.” That organization has no moral authority over us. In fact, I think their ratings are most often laughably inconsistent and their system structurally flawed. Use or ignore them as you see fit.

Personally, I recommend the following websites for checking out in advance movies you might be interested in:

www.metacritic.com

It links to multiple critical and popular reviews of movies, so you can get both the popular response and the professional critical one. And the wide variety ensures that you’ll get an accurate picture of the general consensus.

www.kids-in-mind.com

A great website if you’re concerned about the content of a film, morally speaking. Their summaries of potentially problematic content are clear and extremely thorough, and best of all, they don’t tell you whether or not to see a movie. They understand that this is a decision adults can make for themselves - and for their children, not something that random Internet moralists should dictate to families. The decision is in your hands where it belongs.

That being said, I was not aware that any movie save pornography could be inherently sinful.

Agreed. Subjectively sinful for an individual who struggles with specific things, sure. But never objectively sinful.

I saw it, and no, I will not be confessing it. I see and own many movies that are rated O by the USCCB. I disagree with their opinions 99% of the time.

Me too.

And it’s not the USCCB anymore. The bishops have wisely distanced themselves from movie ratings, which are strictly matters for individual prudential judgment. The ratings are now the sole domain of the lay Catholic News Service.

uch: Frankly that’s the only part that bugs me.I’m heard described in two other review vids as more like an abortion with the latter reviewer saying (much to my dismay) that (paraphrasing) “it’ll go down in history as one of the most iconic sci-fi film moments”.Seeing as how these are .H.R. Giger made creatures I’m not surprised.I mean dang,I know the reason behind the design of the xenomorphs and the reasons for the two mouths and I’ll tell you right now it’s certianly NFSW.I’m just so revolted by how this.I mean the what the xenomorph did the pregnant woman in AVP:Reqium was enuff to make me leap off the couch and stop watching but actually hope that on the DVD release Ridley Scott will give offical statement that it was a C-section and NOT (for the love of Heaven,please say it ain’t so) an abortion or else this will raise some pretty uncomfortable moral questions on this issue particulary regarding it’s depiction in media (good grief just thinking those words makes my stomach turn)…[need “brain bleach”]

I don’t think we have anything to be concerned about regarding that scene’s implications on abortion:

(a) Dr. Shaw tells the machine she needs a “caesarian,” not an “abortion.”

(b) Unlike in an abortion, Dr. Shaw’s surgical removal of the alien parasite does no damage to it whatsoever. It survives through the end of the movie just fine.

(c) It’s an alien parasite, hardly in any way equivalent to human reproduction except on the most soulless, superficial level. Recall that this is a prequel to the Alien franchise, and much of Aliens (the second film) thematically revolves around the contrast, which is explicitly pointed out in the film, between human reproduction and the gory, grotesque parody of it that is the beginning of the aliens’ life cycle.

That’s why my brother always says that Aliens is about a battle between true motherhood (signified by Ripley, who cares for Newt like the daughter she lost) and false motherhood (signified by the alien queen).

 

[edwest2]

I am saddened by people who say do this but not that, and go ahead and ignore what any Catholic reviewer or the Bishops have to say. Personal choice is fine, but there still is such a thing as right and wrong. And if we ignore that then we become our own guides, with anything said by the Bishops or a Catholic reviewer as being second or third in line.

And we, as Catholics, better pay attention to what our leadership is saying. The world tends to side with the sick, disgusting and immoral.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Baelor]

I am saddened by people who say do this but not that, and go ahead and ignore what any Catholic reviewer or the Bishops have to say. Personal choice is fine, but there still is such a thing as right and wrong. And if we ignore that then we become our own guides, with anything said by the Bishops or a Catholic reviewer as being second or third in line.

And we, as Catholics, better pay attention to what our leadership is saying. The world tends to side with the sick, disgusting and immoral.

The Church speaks clearly on that issue – we are to avoid sin and its near occasion. Pornography is inherently sinful. As a matter of prudence, some people should avoid some films, and some films should be avoided by most people. The Church does not wish for “personal choice,” but rather acknowledges the importance of one’s conscience in guiding judgment properly.

 

[colliric]

Well, that may be fine and good, but I’ve grown tired of the “profanity is no big deal”
idea. God willing, I’ll be writing more SF, minus the profanity.

On another front, the T800 does state that it was reprogrammed, which suggests a working, practical knowledge of how to do that. Which implies a knowledge of its full range of function. You take the head of an otherwise destroyed Terminator and reverse engineer it, including getting an understanding of what its capabilities are.

Peace,
Ed

It doesn’t actually say it was significantly reprogrammed, it says that it’s mission paramaters were altered. In other words they reprogrammed the software(possibly through uploading a virus) to change his mission, but left the hardware intact. It still leaves the plot hole because future John Connor would have had to have had alot of insight into what was going to happen, he would have had to do the same “removing the hardware/software handicap” thing in the future and also been 100% aware of the changes that he needed to make.

This would only make sense in light of Terminator 3, which Cameron obviously wasn’t thinking about when he made the film, and even then it would require that John Connor would remember absolutly 100% everything.

It made even more sense to restore the “T-800 operation scene” to it’s rightful place. It’s the most dramatic and well acted scene of the film anyway, with Linda Hamilton(and her twin sister! a bit of old-school hollywood in a CGI laden blockbuster!) in the position to destroy the machine of her nightmare(Forshadowing her assault on Dyson, and later her change in attitude when she see it playing with John as a father does with a son), while John realises he needs it to survive.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

And we, as Catholics, better pay attention to what our leadership is saying.

Yes… but the Catholic News Service and their movie reviewers are not my “leadership.” In any sense.

If I’m concerned about the content of a film I may want to see, morally speaking, I go to www.kids-in-mind.com

Very thorough, so there’s no mistaking what you’ll be seeing - and they don’t patronizingly tell you whether you should see a movie - or whether you should let your kids see it. They leave these choices in your hands.

 

[edwest2]

Yes… but the Catholic News Service and their movie reviewers are not my “leadership.” In any sense.

If I’m concerned about the content of a film I may want to see, morally speaking, I go to www.kids-in-mind.com

Very thorough, so there’s no mistaking what you’ll be seeing - and they don’t patronizingly tell you whether you should see a movie - or whether you should let your kids see it. They leave these choices in your hands.

I prefer Church Authority. I am tired of the vagueness that permeates ideas about right and wrong. We live in a culture where what was Rated R 10 years ago is now, what? PG-13?

Peace,
Ed

 

[colliric]

I prefer Church Authority. I am tired of the vagueness that permeates ideas about right and wrong. We live in a culture where what was Rated R 10 years ago is now, what? PG-13?

Peace,
Ed

No, it’s not that bad. What was once R rated 10 years ago is mostly NC-17(in your country) these days, or MA15+ in mine.

I agree It’s shameful rating standards have laxed, but please don’t exaggerate it.

 

[principio]

Prometheus was a terrible film and should be rated O, not because of the anti religious message, but because it was very badly written and directed. The story and characters were unconvincing and the plot was highly illogical despite the fantastic premise. Even if you accepted the premise that aliens created us, the filmmakers did a very bad job making that believable. Who cares if the special effects were amazing, the story seemed like it was written by 8th graders, so the effects were a waste of time and millions of dollars.

Nobody should take this film seriously.

 

[anp1215]

I prefer Church Authority. I am tired of the vagueness that permeates ideas about right and wrong. We live in a culture where what was Rated R 10 years ago is now, what? PG-13?

Peace,
Ed

but the Catholic movie reviews are not Church authority, as others have said.

 

[anp1215]

No, it’s not that bad. What was once R rated 10 years ago is mostly NC-17(in your country) these days, or MA15+ in mine.

I agree It’s shameful rating standards have laxed, but please don’t exaggerate it.

I’m a little confused…NC 17 is worse than R.