That link only answered the David infecting Holloway question, and that's still re ed.
some questions answered:
http://io9.com/5917448/all-of-your-l...ium=socialflow
other question/observation:
Does anyone else think the Star Map showed Earth because it read David's mind? The Star Map hologram didn't seem to be from the past...it actually seemed to be interacting with him. Remember, the Earth appeared overhead and slowly came down to David, as he realized it was Earth, it shut down. If I'm not mistaken, it also showed a traced path to Earth.
That link only answered the David infecting Holloway question, and that's still re ed.
I think David was doing way more than is explicitly let on. Like I said before, dude understood their language and was reading everything and activating their equipment. When you combine his actions toward the crew and toward his "father" I think he was plotting all along. You have no idea what he says to the engineer that makes him go nuts.
I'm not familiar with Lawrence of Arabia but I wonder the significance of that movie and David.
Just saw this movie last night, it was entertaining but like everyone seems to agree, the execution could have been much better. This quote from a link someone posted is pretty good :
The movie's biggest problem is that one of the main protagonists is a (maybe) nihilistic robot who (maybe) has no emotions, (maybe) no ethics and (maybe) no motives. Lot of "maybes" in that last sentence? That's because the movie doesn't answer any of them. Everything in this movie is a big mystery, except it's not the fun kind of mystery you like to solve, it's the ty kind where your girlfriend stops talking to you and she says "nothing" when you ask her what's wrong. It makes me so ing mad I want to puncture my ball sack with a pen. And unlike real life, you can't just dump her and bang her hotter friend, because her friend is Madagascar 3: fat and ugly.
The problem with making David a protagonist is that he's utterly unrelatable. Even as an antagonist he's utterly unrelatable because we don't know what his motives are, or even if he has any. It's like trying to make a toaster your lead character in a movie. Is the toaster good? Is it bad? What are its motives? Nothing, because it's a ing toaster. It has one job to do: make toast. David's character is slightly less compelling than a toaster because we don't even know what his purpose is. At least a toaster was created for a reason. David was created to frustrate people who wanted to see a good movie.
That works off of the assumption that David is a protagonist. I am not sure I agree with that. There's a lot of similarity b/w that character and HAL 9000 (from "2001"). I think he is more of an antagonist.
That is bull . How was the T1000 relatable? How was HAL 9000 relatable? Both those antagonists were just as unrelatable or even more so (HAL 9000 was a space ship) than David and they are two of the greatest antagonists in cinema history.
What the did I just watch? Could someone please give me the 10 peso version? I feel like the writers just played a sci-fi mad libs and tried to make a movie out of it.
beside the plot, how about those characters?! The good ol down to Earth ruff n' tumblin black guy, the curious and nerdy biologist who won't leave an obviously defensive alien species alone, the corporate ice queen , the quiet "just stay out of my way!" guy with a rebellious hairdo, and all the pioneering scientists who decide to take off their helmets because..well..at least there's oxygen! What could possibly float around in air that could harm humans?
I had high hopes from the beginning with the Lawrence of Arabia references. That's my
Finally watching this, about 30 minutes in and the only thing I have to say is HOLY IDRIS ELBA'S SOUTHERN ACCENT IS ING HORRIBLE.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)