rigorousintuition.ca

Project Willow wrote:All dicks are bigger on the Internet.

More than one level of truth in that statement.

ida pingala wrote:
Pretty bland and unimaginative, coming from someone calling self 'JackRiddler'.

I'm happy to serve you, new 10-letter user name.

ida pingala wrote:Pretty bland and unimaginative, coming from someone calling self 'JackRiddler'.

Ida talk like Tarzan. Grrr.

Hello, here's something about roman erotic art, just for fun

Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum was discovered in the ancient cities around the bay of Naples (particularly of Pompeii and Herculaneum) after extensive excavations began in the 18th century. The city was found to be full of erotic art and frescoes, symbols, and inscriptions regarded by its excavators as pornographic. Even many recovered household items had a sexual theme. The ubiquity of such imagery and items indicates that the sexual mores of the ancient Roman culture of the time were much more liberal than most present-day cultures, although much of what might seem to us to be erotic imagery (e.g. oversized phalluses) could arguably be fertility-imagery. This clash of cultures led to an unknown number of discoveries being hidden away again.



In 1819, when King Francis I of Naples visited the Pompeii exhibition at the National Museum with his wife and daughter, he was so embarrassed by the erotic artwork that he decided to have it locked away in a secret cabinet, accessible only to "people of mature age and respected morals". Re-opened, closed, re-opened again and then closed again for nearly 100 years, it was briefly made accessible again at the end of the 1960s (the time of the sexual revolution) and was finally re-opened for viewing in 2000. Minors are still only allowed entry to the once secret cabinet in the presence of a guardian or with written permission.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_art ... erculaneum

Also, forget about that white marble look, greek and roman statues were actually painted in "garish colors", see: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2011/marc ... 31711.html

brekin wrote:I always thought the Engineers looked like a fusion of Pinhead from Hell Raiser and Right Said Fred

Engineer

The Engineer is a character in the film Hellraiser. A demon which prowls the corridors of Hell, the Engineer resembles an amalgamation of various animals. The Engineer first appears to chase Kirsty Cotton out of Hell when she solves the Lament Configuration puzzle box in her hospital room. Later, after Kirsty banishes the Cenobites back to Hell and attempts to escape her rapidly decaying house, the Engineer appears again. Grappling with Kirsty and her boyfriend Steve as they attempt to reclaim the Lament Configuration, the Engineer is banished back to Hell when Kirsty manages to grab the puzzle box and solves it.

8bitagent wrote:First off, the space jockey in Alien is massive. And it didn't seem like that was merely a pilot suit, but more organic. Ridly Scott did a bad fan fiction retconning to his own beautiful work

.....I was actually half-expecting something a bit more :



than :

2012 Countdown wrote:And now that I am thinking about the end, after his ship goes down, he goes after the woman. There are other ships there. "Many" according to the robot. Why not just start another ship and leave? No! He had to go after the stranded woman who would die in a few weeks anyway. Or...get in you ship, orbit, then blast the stranded. Again, his emotion overcomes him and he gets ambushed by the monster. It all seems so silly.

Now that I think about it too, it does seem like more of a plot driven sequence than anything else. An excuse to show a giant thing at the end. Realistically, he should have gone to another ship and left. Maybe he wanted to make sure all humans are dead, starting with her before leaving. I don't know.

Mr.Wonderful...

Yes, I anticipated such an answer, but I also remind you, the Engineer was perfectly willing to leave them behind as he made his escape in the first ship. It must be then that his anger, and that alone caused him to seek revenge on a personal level. An enraged...human. He could have hopped in another, and sped away as he was doing before the crash of the first. And I also remind you it was assumed he was on his way to annihilate Earth, ergo, had weapons onboard. Use them first on the survivors, if you really need to do that (me using sense), for as far as he knew, they were stranded. (I agree functionally forced spot for the monster to be put in for the big reveal/tie-in though).

And thats the whole deal for me anyway. I mean, furthermore, if you're going to throw around a heavy Chistengineer angle, I want my Christalien to practice what he preaches too.

Seeing semper occultus's post, now I am imagining yet another justification. Maybe the 'engineers' aren't Christaliens at all! Maybe they are deceiving us. Maybe they're 'demons'!
hehe

Alf wrote:Hello, here's something about roman erotic art, just for fun

Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum was discovered in the ancient cities around the bay of Naples (particularly of Pompeii and Herculaneum) after extensive excavations began in the 18th century. The city was found to be full of erotic art and frescoes, symbols, and inscriptions regarded by its excavators as pornographic. Even many recovered household items had a sexual theme. The ubiquity of such imagery and items indicates that the sexual mores of the ancient Roman culture of the time were much more liberal than most present-day cultures, although much of what might seem to us to be erotic imagery (e.g. oversized phalluses) could arguably be fertility-imagery. This clash of cultures led to an unknown number of discoveries being hidden away again.



In 1819, when King Francis I of Naples visited the Pompeii exhibition at the National Museum with his wife and daughter, he was so embarrassed by the erotic artwork that he decided to have it locked away in a secret cabinet, accessible only to "people of mature age and respected morals". Re-opened, closed, re-opened again and then closed again for nearly 100 years, it was briefly made accessible again at the end of the 1960s (the time of the sexual revolution) and was finally re-opened for viewing in 2000. Minors are still only allowed entry to the once secret cabinet in the presence of a guardian or with written permission.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_art ... erculaneum

Also, forget about that white marble look, greek and roman statues were actually painted in "garish colors", see: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2011/marc ... 31711.html

I find that strangely, well hot. Ive never seen classical depiction of cunning linguist, even in Japanese wood art. It's always coitus or fellatio.

2012 Countdown wrote:Seeing semper occultus's post, now I am imagining yet another justification. Maybe the 'engineers' aren't Christaliens at all! Maybe they are deceiving us. Maybe they're 'demons'!
hehe

There's no way a "Prometheus II" will ever get made without the angle of Good vs. Bad aliens, or at least Hostile vs. Non-Hostile (i.e., to humans). Viewers of that film, if it gets made (and I may not be among them) will hear if the big bald guys really were the creators, why they created, why they turned against, etc., and no doubt there will be another side saying, "no, no, humans are worthy!" It will never be made without some kind of opposition on that question.

However, this will not answer your question. Furthermore, I don't care what answer a potential "Prometheus II" will give, especially since the story of "Prometheus" is not "based on" an existing text, other than the Greek myth available to everyone. And it was never announced as a package deal (unlike LoTR, Potter, etc.). Conditional package deals ("Watch me and I might give you a sequel") do not count. Seriously. A sequel's commentary and riffs on the original movie are no more valid than those of the audience who have only seen the one movie. An author has hegemony only over what they present within a work, not the interpretation you will have to accept after some theoretical sequel. The movie stands or falls exclusively on its own. The story in the movie is the whole story, period.

One of the strengths of this (for me) enjoyable, but necessarily flawed film (because of the parameters of $120 mn budget, horror genre tropes and all the rest) was in the way it left the biggest questions unexplained.

They could make a whole movie just about the cute little squiddly guy and I'd be perfectly happy.

barracuda wrote:

They could make a whole movie just about the cute little squiddly guy and I'd be perfectly happy.

Working title: Alien 5: Tickle Me Squiddly

Alright... I hate to beat a dead horse, but my twelve year old and I, went and saw Prometheus over the weekend. We loved it. Even armed with eleven pages of RI info about plot holes big enough to fly starships through, I enjoyed the hell out of it. That said, I want to point out something that hasn't been brought up. Ridley Scott loves strong women. Be it Ripley in the original Alien movie, or Dr. Shaw in this, the women are at the center of the action, and the whole movie revolves around them... and that is as cool as hell. You can see it in a lot of his movies, be it his Thelma and Louise characters or Maid Marian in his version of Robin Hood. They are the fulcrum that the story revolves around. In a culture that treats everyone like morons, any movie that makes people think about their reality, and makes women, the heros of the story, is OK by me. Just sayin...

Skunkboy wrote:Alright... I hate to beat a dead horse, but my twelve year old and I, went and saw Prometheus over the weekend. We loved it. Even armed with eleven pages of RI info about plot holes big enough to fly starships through, I enjoyed the hell out of it. That said, I want to point out something that hasn't been brought up. Ridley Scott loves strong women. Be it Ripley in the original Alien movie, or Dr. Shaw in this, the women are at the center of the action, and the whole movie revolves around them... and that is as cool as hell. You can see it in a lot of his movies, be it his Thelma and Louise characters or Maid Marian in his version of Robin Hood. They are the fulcrum that the story revolves around. In a culture that treats everyone like morons, any movie that makes people think about their reality, and makes women, the heros of the story, is OK by me. Just sayin...

Yes, it was notable that the two final (human) survivors were women and just running hard to get out of the way of the crashing mega-ship.

I am glad this thread is still alive and kicking, even if it is just to bug the hell out of Maccruiskeen.

Skunkboy wrote:Alright... I hate to beat a dead horse, but my twelve year old and I, went and saw Prometheus over the weekend. We loved it. Even armed with eleven pages of RI info about plot holes big enough to fly starships through, I enjoyed the hell out of it. That said, I want to point out something that hasn't been brought up. Ridley Scott loves strong women. Be it Ripley in the original Alien movie, or Dr. Shaw in this, the women are at the center of the action, and the whole movie revolves around them... and that is as cool as hell. You can see it in a lot of his movies, be it his Thelma and Louise characters or Maid Marian in his version of Robin Hood. They are the fulcrum that the story revolves around. In a culture that treats everyone like morons, any movie that makes people think about their reality, and makes women, the heros of the story, is OK by me. Just sayin...

Agreed. I enjoyed the movie too despite its flaws. And yes, this one's going into the blu-ray collection once it's available.