See, I didn't need an explanation of the ooze. Not even a little bit.
Can we make the comparison of Alien to Prometheus? Is that fair? Honest question.
In Alien, you don't know ANYTHING about the Aliens, just like your outline of the goo is. You don't know what the eggs are, what the space jockey is (it's a set piece people, a set piece), where the Alien comes from, it's just "bad shite."
So why oh why is that ok but Prometheus isn't?
In Alien, Scott provides enough CLEAR detail to know what it is, answer some questions, and keep things hidden and satisfying at the same time.
Facts that you do get:
1. After Hurt's chest bursting scene, it's clear that the jockey also went through that. A very large humanoid alien had the same thing happen. Fair enough.
2. You know, for a fact, the alien lays an egg in victims
3. That egg grows and becomes another alien rapidly. It is built for defense in that situation.
4. That alien baby turns into an alien, maybe not a queen, but an alien.
So where did the eggs come from? Where is the Queen? Right there are still questions, but NONE of those questions are relevant (until later films). And most can be at least assumed:
One of two things happen to the crashed ship:
1. Either they WERE Carrying the aliens, which hatched and destroyed the crew
2. Or it crashed first, then the Aliens invaded the area
Both are satisfying conclusions, honestly. And after ONLY seeing Alien, it is quite clear, clear enough, about what was going on.
Then to Prometheus, well let's just sum it up:
I know enough about it to know that it's some evil, weird shite. It's bad enough that it can frick up one dude and turn him into a zombie thing, or make some other dude impregnate a chick and she has an organism inside her that grows exponentially fast, or that it can create weird snake-like creatures that can frick shite up, etc. The black ooze is some bad shite..that's the bottom line
There's no consistency. The movie itself starts out posing a gigantic question concerning the new aliens, the goo and life itself. I mean, that is the assumption you have to make.
But it never explains the goo.
Some people may want to know what the ooze is, what it does specifically, why/how it was created, etc. But you certainly don't need to know any of that, because it isn't relevant to the movie when it comes down to it. All you need to know is that it's just some bad shite...that's it...time to go home. Just like he said.
You specifically do need to know because the director flat out asks you in the first scene, "What is this substance that can create life in death?"
But then it does way more than that. It becomes a tool for the writer, not a tool for the narrative itself. There is a difference.
It has to be Lindelhof as the difference between us. I think, as a writer, he asks questions then uses some device in his plots to solve anything you can come up with. He doesn't think anything through and creates faux "mystery" out of meaning what he perceives as true meaning.
There were few rules for the island or for the black smoke monster. Same for the goo. And that's just weak writing. If the goo means everything, then it means nothing. And since it was the central plot device of the film, the film means nothing as well, hence the backlash.
This post was edited on 4/11 at 10:30 am