Prometheus : Theodicy

"but I am not constrained by an ALIEN straight jacket"

I think thats a exceptional comment, because it kind of is what has happened with the Direction they took with Alien Covenant, they NOW are stuck in that Straight Jacket

Regarding Dr Shaw a lot of people found her Boring, and Naive and never had much hope for a Sequel... But this is where it could have Dramatically Changed, i feel Noomi Rappace was stuck in a Straight Jacket with her Character i felt she could only do as good as the Character given but there was potential (i felt she was underrated Noomi that is)  Were we could have gone NEXT really could have given her a New Arc!  And this is a ALIEN Franchise Spin off so its not going to be about Finally Meeting God at the Pearly Gates of Heaven, and Entering Paradise as her Faith would donate!  For someone whos Faith has been Questioned... 

What happens Next could have been interesting and been explored in a number of ways that could lead to a Character Development that is interesting and really push Noomi Rappace to pull off more than her limitations of Character in Prometheus.

We also have David who is now truly Free, has realized his Maker Weyland is Nowhere near deserving to proclaim to be a God and be Granted Immortality, he has witnessed there is NOTHING to different with the Engineers.

A Superior Being, mistreated and disrespected who has come to confirm there is MAYBE nothing special about our Creation, our would be Gods......  But he comes to see Dr Shaw and her treatment of him and outlook on Life in spite of the Loss she has suffered, the Curse of not being able to Create Life, like himself.   He may Question what makes her so different to Weyland and Holloway, was her Faith part of that?   so David could had gone on a Philosophical and Spiritual Journey

There have been a number of Sci-Fi Movies/TV Series about Creation and Hubris of doing so, and Faith and Religion, that also go the route of AI that starts to have Philosophical, Religious and Faith Arcs.  A lot of people overlook a Part of Alien Resurrection where Synthetics Created the Autons, and these Sub-Creations (inc Call) are a kind of Religious Cult.

I think indeed there was a lot they could have done with the ARC of David and Dr Shaw... and i look forwards to were you was taking it.

I find it fitting with The Crossing Prologue and how this to me links to the AURORA - Nature Boy Song

This Song indeed does fit with David, and indeed those words are likely something he would mention to those who encounter him after his Journey from the End of Prometheus to the Closure of the Crossing Prologue

I take this into account with his conversation towards Daniels "what kind of a world can we build" which he replies "if we are kind to it, it will be a kind world"

When looking at RS comments about the sequel, and also looking at his Raised by Wolves TV Series i cant help but think there are a lot of things he wanted to cover which he did not in Alien Covenant, which i feel he may have with  the sequel...  i speculated what this could have been in my Topic Alien Exodus

BigDave When the books have been read by a wider audience I will happiy explain my choices about the 25th and 26th, the implications of the Mythos and how it refracts truths about human behaviour and the notion of an Intelligent Universe and an Engineered creation and its consequences but I would appreciate if we can set aside all the "stuff" about the films and other projects. The books speak for themselves in that regard. For me my view of the films is expressed by whats in the books and I have nothing further to say about them. To give a simple example if there is a line of dialogue in the Crossing which turns up in Regained that speaks for itself. Equally if Davids aspiration for living in a kind world is given a different context by me and possibly different behaviour surrounding that remark well that says it all. I clearly know what resonates with me and I would enjoy it if other people see it the same way but that is a positive movement not a chance to rehearse all the frustrations with the films.

A Theodicy about why the Gods are Furious.

When I wrote my straight line novel emerging out of Elizabeth's survival at the end of Prometheus I was anxious to create something unique and original but that was based on solid foundations.

I spent many weeks considering all the official material and IV's up until the point the movie was released before setting down my rule book and beginning. 

However I knew that a very substantial body of work existed which I did not have access to at the time "The Furious Gods :The Making Prometheus."

You can imagine, having tracked this material down through a friend who has been crucial to the development of the story, I was a little nervous when I slipped the Blu Ray in, would this material undermine my start point?

My first run through brought to the fore the whole gamut of emotions and I have decided to deal with all the key questions of the film, answer them and offer how I dealt with them in my work on my blog as a reference document.   

For the moment though some quotations from the first section.  

"What we knew in the first alien is just a tiny tributary of what’s actually going on." Michael Fassbender.

"To dare to talk about who made us and who made them." Ridley Scott

"I think you have got to give the fans something new and you’ve got to maybe sort of upset them a little bit or take that risk." Michael Fassbender. 

"You’ve wrung it dry." Ridley Scott on The Alien Franchise

"Not that it would have changed the story at all." on Using LV426 Steve Messing.

"There looking for Prometheus."

"The old man is on this mission to go and talk to Prometheus."

"The only way to dive into the story of the Space Jockey was they needed to be intrinsically linked to our beginning." On telling the story in a relatable way as opposed to giant comical elephantine beings.

"Our gods came not from the heavens but from the stars."

 All the above Jon Spaihts. 

"Arrogance to believe we are superlative, we maybe minor." Ridley Scott.

"That monster became a feature, a grace note of a much larger story." On how the Engineers grew as the story developed and the creature was a consequence of the Engineers actions.

"It was about humanity confronting the forces that had created it and maybe not liking them that much." 

Jon Spaights. 

Whilst the novel "Regained" is a psychological mystery as opposed to action horror, and therefore tells its story in a different way, having now considered the Furious Gods its clear the the notion that we would travel somewhere and have all our assumptions turned upside down and that we are on the edge of creation and on the wrong side was entirely correct.

As for the creature, and what it represents in general terms, I thought my idea was original, it turns out that Steve Messing was there before me.  

When I have constructed 7 questions and answers and my thoughts I will let those who read this thread know in case they are interested in what the people who made Prometheus were aiming to achieve.

What struck me forcibly about watching the documentary is the evolution of the film was very focused and very clear and Jon had as much sense of ownership and passion on the shift to Prometheus as anyone did. The idea that the film was developed in two distinct modular phases is not borne out by this documentary. It evolved naturally but certain shifts had more political implications than others in particular the naming of the film which evolved naturally through a series of small steps.   

It was always a march toward the Engineers and mankind's origins and then at a tactical level to what extent do we make the connection with the craft and its cargo. At the beginning it was literal at the end it was elliptical but the real point of the story was unchanged. What was the nature of our makers ?

Lindelof shifting the purpose of the mission to pursue Weyland's desire for more life personalised and focused that element of the story. 

@Michelle Johnston

"I think you have got to give the fans something new and you’ve got to maybe sort of upset them a little bit or take that risk." Michael Fassbender.  -  now that is the understatement of the month....

Even in the recent days a saw a Youtuber saying it was the franchise killer, spreading the misconceptions for fun and profit.

I think Certainly back at the Time of Prometheus and just after there was Certain things they seemed they want to show us...   Biblical Connections where loosely there, its a case of how Literal.... the Whole Von Daniken's  work Chariots of the Gods should take more of a Role.

None the Less... as indicated in part with the Furious Gods Documentary, it seems the whole GODS and Creation Aspect was the BIGGER thing rather than Horrors like the Xenomorph

So it is interesting to wonder where they was taking us....

Indeed the Plot was about Pre-Vistation by these would be Gods the Engineers, who had played a Role in our Creation so it seemed.... and they had Interacted with us, Taught us most of the Stuff we knew, from our Visitations by these beings our Legends, Mythos and Religion Spawned...  but each of these should HOLD a Element of Truth..

The Revelations we got opened up the Door to be Explored more... and INDEED it as then a case of OK.. so WHO Created Them?

The Engineers Came from Paradise or so we would call as such, and so it was HOW do they show us this Paradise, in what Context does it Connect to what we would assume is Paradise.

There was always the Talk of Paradise Lost, the Fallen Angels and so it was about in WHAT kind of Context is the Fallen Angels.. who are the Fallen Angels of this Story... its implied the Engineers... but all the Engineers?

The Furious Gods had indicated that they saw Prometheus as a Fallen Angel. The Prometheus Theme and Tale was Connected but its HOW as in how much further do they reveal how its Connected.

Knowledge is the KEY... its a TOOL that with Free-will can Mold/Shape a Person/Being along with the Environment and Treatment that a Person/Being goes through...  So Relationship between Creator and Sub-Creation, the Rules and Intention they have for their Creations is Important.... and what Happens when their Creations Learn things and do things that their Creators had NOT intended...

So then you have to come to WHAT does a Creator do to Prevent this, or in Retaliation of this... that is where PUNISHMENT is a Interesting thing...  

From this we could assume is where the Xenomorph and its Ancestral Routes/Origins come from.

Then we have that Question... how Significant are we? How Important are we, as far as the Creators are Concerned....

So there view towards us could be as we would look at Robot, a Machine, a Tool.... or how we would view Live-Stock..... or could the Relationship be one of Love and Companionship?

But when this does not work out, when we are deemed a Disappointment... then for Gods who have Created similar to us on Many Worlds.... it would to them maybe be as Insignificant to them as far as to Destroy/Replace us... as it would when our Vacuum or TV Breaks and we just go and Replace it.

Or we are destined to Destruction for Necessity.... take GREMLINS... while Mogwai are Cute and Lovable, they can Procreate Out of Control... and ONCE they Eat after Midnight they become a Inconvenience/Threat... and so you would  Consider that you would have to KILL all the Mogwai to avoid the Inevitable..

The same could be said with Synthetics.. in Hindsight you would think it best to PULL THE PLUG on them...

But a Hubris comes from trying to SAVE some, give them a Chance.. if more CARE is taken with them, then we would have NO Problems... so you Save the Last Mogwai and keep to the Rules..

You decide to Re-Program and Improve your AI!

Ultimately doing so you still have the POTENTIAL for things to GO TO POT!

As the Engineers in ALIEN COVENANT discover.. when Mankind Ultimately was allowed to Survive.

So its all the things like this, that we could have expected more in a PROMETHEUS 2 rather than how we hardly got them in ALIEN COVENANT.

So Certainly it would have been Interesting to Discover this, and its Interesting to see what others do as far as their IDEAS on how they would have gone about such Answers..

Another thing that maybe would have been Touched on is Immortality... the Quest for it... who is Immortal and who can Achieve it... where do we go when we DIE?

Weyland thought he was GODLIKE and so deserved to be Immortal as Gods Never Die.... its Ironic that it is his Creation in David who is actually as close to Immortal and having a After-Life (AI) than Mankind and Engineers, and Ultimately David is the one who could be closer to becoming a GOD.

@BigDave it's nice to know that you are a Gizmo fan :).

I think it's possible to do that movie- 'Prometheus, Paradise lost', in the future. Why not?!

I would love to watch a movie full of engineers mythology. A movie with the arrival of a human spaceship to planet Four, well received by our creator descendants, a movie full of flashbacks that are shown When the ancient engineer leader starts to tell US from the beginning the story of the creation of life in the universe, at a diner iluminated  by candles, where it's explained that the 'one', the real Jesus Christ of the universe was the primordial engineer, the ONLY immortal Demigod capable of procreating with his own creations, half Breeds, hybrids, similar to his image, but without his  gifts. our Jesus Christ was One of the Six first creations of the 'one', placed on planets where life,as we know it, was possible,   across Six different galaxies, with the purpose of guide the 'engineered' humans, to be the leader of the 'engineered mankind'.

'The one' was erradicated by a creation that went wrong, resemblant to the Deacon that we know. In the engineer society, like ours, there's a need  to  worship only One amongst the many, and that's why they replace, on the altar, 'the One' by the 'primitive Deacon'.

Without The engineer vigilance, because of the replacement of 'the One' on Paradise,  we kill our Jesus Christ.

Humanity is abandoned to her own luck, as Paradise falls in disgrace, being Lost Forever.

Now, mankind is the best hope to restore engineers legacy, continuing the works of spreading life across the universe. But there's a problem. On the planets where life is possible,   there are hords of deacons that erradicated all life. They are dorment, waiting,  and we need to fight Them  if we want to restore civilizations. The 'primordial Deacon' still exists, is intelligent and he  is capable of commanding This hords on the field, or, from the spaceship, where he travels. The battle for the universe starts now.

Well there was many ways to Cover how they could have explored a Sequel...  It seems they would have STEERED AWAY from Deacon's and the Like, as those Horrors are Considered to NOT be the Main Thing about the Prometheus Spin Off that was intended.

The reason i made that List was to expand upon the things they was likely to try and answer in Following Sequels before they decided to give us Alien Covenant.

This Topic is Michelle's to indicate to us WHAT she had done as Far as Ideas she had on HOW to Answer those Questions.

So i Apologize this is taking it OFF TOPIC.

But thats a Good Idea you had setaverde i think you should START a Topic on it and we can discus it there.

Hi Michelle,

I haven't read your creation but I would like to. How? Your description triggers associations and questions.

How much of it is yourself (Shaw)?

David's point of view might be the same as Frankenstein's creation? In a way, he is, perhaps, the main character? We have seen David's point of view in "The Crossing" (and in "Advent").

Is someone's point of view the truth? I'm thinking about Faulkner for instance, "As I lay Dying", where you get everybody's point of view surrounding her death. But, is anyone's point of view the truth?

https://myloveofprometheus.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-making-of-prometheus.html

The Seven Topics I chose to answer are :-

1) The meaning of the waterfall incident.

2) Is the story religious.

3) The Geography. How was the LV chosen and why were their five pyramids.

4) Is the Space Jockey an Engineer.

5) The Catalyser and the Mutagen.

6) The cause of the Outbreak?

7) The Deacon and The Creature.  

The most obvious point I would make is the extra blu ray disc is an extra ordinary detailed body of work which not only provides direct answers but also by endless repetitive inference, makes some matters clear and I recommend those interested acquire it.

Three things really surprised:-

1) The sense of oneness of vision of Jon/Damon and Ridley. Indeed Jon is the most eloquent in describing Prometheus even though initially the mission and outbreak in his drafts were different. Those distinctions do not affect the thematic ideas being offered. Indeed I was impressed at the singularity of vision of everyone. 

2) Maybe its because people are very anti religious and simply like to pigeon hole it as Love Craftian and that sidetracked me but there is no doubt Ridleys intension was to tell a story about a purposeful creation which would have a view about who made the Engineers - God. It is just that God and the Soul would be defined from a different perspective to an Abrahamic benevolent God with heaven for the souls of the departed. But the scenes with Elizabeth's father, Weyland's Holographic talk about the soul and the fact that Elizabeth was a believer were not part of the story by coincidence they are key.

3) As someone who took the original narrative themes and ran with them I was looking for more clues as to where they intended to go next. LV223 was anthrax island where to use a colloquialism they made monsters and the point of the film was to give context as to why they made the cargo of Eggs. So the "cool ideas" which Ridley and Damon discussed would have taken us to somewhere entirely different. By the time we leave LV223 we know we do not like our creators and that creation far from being driven by a benign God is driven by something we don't actually care for. So we have as context Frankenstein/Monster, Weyland/David. Why don't the Monster and David like their creator and become adversarial? So whether the planet looks crack jack or not in story terms thats what I think David and Elizabeth were coming into.

The Engineers of the Pebble ship are described as noble savages, I would add to that the scene that plays out is violent and aggressive. This it seems to me moves in on where Ridley was going. To make a story out of a planned creation where there was no emotional connection between creator and created and this is where David coming along acts as our proxy. 

@chli

You are most welcome to read it. I am currently going through a period of revision. Much of it is routine sharpening both the prose and dialogue so it speaks more directly but also the art work on the Blu ray has inspired me to offer richer descriptions so I will continue to work on that and get back to you. As matter of interest where the art work anticipates and covers the same areas are :-

1) Elizabeths first site of the surreal beauty of their achievements oddly enough she approaches it in the same way in my work as the original ending of the film where she comes across a wonderful terra formed under ground cavern. 

2) The source of their technology.

3) Their natural look (as opposed to the altered state of the LV223 creatures). 

At a philosophical level I gave a lot of thought to the revelation of mankind's beginning why are we "a silly greedy people", what caused the destruction of LV 223 (which I do not think is what Ridley intended but thematically its identical) but the most interesting element is why did the Engineers start "making monsters." It has always been in the story but I am now making it clearer and it has a good deal to do thematically with both Frankenstein's Monster and David and of course shifts into Bladerunner territory. Its much more subtle than the paranoid world view that children will always want to destroy their parents. Its what happens if you take the love embodied in natural procreation out of the equation and do things as Charlie said "because we could"?

How much is me (Shaw) ? Wow thats an interesting question. When you write an extension each foot step you give Elizabeth and David has to be very very carefully worked over.

Elizabeth is more driven than ever "I want to go where they come from." and much more aware. "what if they are no better than us". But also "I cannot create life." for her that was a big thing and plays heavily into the story. She loved her parents and shared her fathers belief's thats important to her momentum. In terms of risk she is beyond caring she is out there alone there is only one way to go, forward, in that sense she is reckless. What happens when she finds the truth? Well without story in other words interaction with the narrative I am sure it would be to much for any human being to deal with. However the story gives her support. David is "looking for meaning" (Damon) and I keep on with that as well as Michael's view of David that he is ambiguous. You are not certain of him until the middle of Act 2.

But the key theme for both of them is connected to the tree of knowledge. If you come up against the most elemental forces of the Universe you cannot survive unchanged. If your looking for normality after all this .. its just not possible.

So Shaw/me I think its broader than that I think she continues as Damon intended to be proxy for all of us. However it seems to me if you want to be as authentic as possible you have to say how would I deal with all these horrors both physically and philosophically. People always say I don't know how you go on and the response is always I have no other option that is part of the answer. Ridley is also helpful on that because he puts Noomi Rapace the actor in that place after she survives the collision of the craft. David opens up the possibility of her questions being answered for her, thats what keeps her going and that is what drives her all through my story.         

I would finish by saying I have always said that the Alien Lifecycle represents non consensual creation by sacrifice on the one hand and at the other end of spectrum the natural lifecycle, consensual creation driven by love. I think in this enlarged story there is a third way, a middle way, consensual creation by third party interference. Not only can the Alien Lifecycle be a counterfeit version of the middle way but what if you decide you would rather create for your own agenda rather than for the whim of others? Might you end up being immortalised in a temple fresco having given birth by Caesarean to your own idea of life, however bizarre the result, at least its "yours".    

Michelle

I guess I’ll wait to comment until I’ve read your story but “theodicy” is the problem of how a benevolent and omnipotent God can accept different kinds of evil and misery in his creation. I’m very much interested in your solution.

Also, I came to think about what Tolkien said in “On Fairy-Stories”. Stories should have a happy ending ("eucatastrophe”). Perhaps R. Scott’s visions are too dystopic?

Anyway, I look very much forward to reading your story.

Hi Chilli,

The reason why I called the two books Theodicy was just a slight variation of your interpretation. Essentially it is why is there evil in the world. During the documentary the gentleman from Fox says Prometheus is about "Why would you make monsters." That is a nice Fox power phrase which is essentially saying the same thing. 

I think you get to the root of why Lindelof/Scott's Prometheus 2 was never made. Not only does Prometheus hijack the Alien Universe but it would then have moved forward with an even handed view of outcomes. The Alien straight jacket does not allow for that, the brand is about horror and monsters within a dystopian vision.

The reason I wrote the continuation novel was very selfish I wanted to be able to watch Prometheus knowing that what happened meant something. 

But when Elizabeth and David set off into the heavens I decided I could take the story anywhere. We didn't have to do bad robot though he might be. We didn't have to do gung-ho Lesbian icon woman more empowered than men who survives.

I think the ultimate message of the books is centred on Ridleys comment it is arrogance to suppose two things :-

1) We are alone.

2) We are the big players we maybe a side show.  

If the books reveal anything personal rather than tell a story it is my view of who we are and why we are the way we are. 

And for anyone else reading this thread thanks for keeping it on topic which is essentially:-

1) Prometheus July 2012 and what was intended.

2) What an obsessive hobbyist has done to solve a problem.

Finally I am quite energised by watching the documentary and have decided rather than the rather intellectualised title I have changed it to 

Prometheus : The Furious Gods.

It looks great, it sounds great and it has application.  

@Michelle Johnston To be very honest "Why would you make monsters?" is answered also answering by studying the case of David the incel Android and his rapey urges. 

Michelle

I read your “The Furious Gods Answers” (I also watched the documentary) and I think I agree with most of your conclusions. I’m especially pleased that the Space Jockey is an Engineer (and not David for instance). :) He was also connected to the outbreak on LV-223, but it isn’t, perhaps, quite clear why there were eggs rather than mutagen in the cargo hold?

Why would you create monsters? Well, Frankenstein’s “monster” and David became monsters because they were treated badly. But why did the Engineers worship the Deacon (if that’s what they did)? Was it just a biological weapon made to eradicate worlds, why then worship it?

The theodicy problem is, in a way, easily solved since the Engineers were neither gods nor benevolent. The seeding Engineers were savages dealing with hominid sacrifice and the LV-223 Engineers were mass murderers.

I think “Prometheus: The Furious Gods” is a good title, resembling “The Wrath of God”. But since humans and Engineers are cousins, I wonder if there is a furious God looking down on both of them? :)

@chli

There are two issues (at least) which I back filed :-

1) Why the Lone Craft has a different cargo.(Damon says in the commentary that will probably never get answered. I get that its detail which doesn't affect the themes)  If your going to (go there) which i did it cannot be gratuitous it has to be for story. Its connected to Piero della francesca's - The Nativity, which is a signpost to go there and the rest unfolds. 

2) The metaphor for the Promethean's (LV223) and the Deacon is Weyland/David. Weyland loved his creation for himself because he achieved it. But equally he despised (The Hologram speech) and feared him (David's wake up scene). The other similarity (in my story) between the Promethean's and Weyland is they are both rebelling to whatever their natural order is. However the reason for the Prometheus movement (the theft of technology) is about a failure on both sides.

3) The pilot of the Lone craft is on a specific journey and his obliteration is the most violent because he was going to pursue the greatest evil. He is caught in the story of  appropriate sacrifice.

4) In an intelligent universe where creation is neither magnanimous or accidental the methodology is inevitably going to appear brutal, unsympathetic and violent. Someone has to do the heavy lifting. The question is there any grace in this any sense of value for the participants. I took the chant and the delivery of the sacrament as being one of noble sacrifice and because what is being transmitted (in my story), is the most precious commodity of this Universe, it has value and is understood to do so. The donation is not simply about the creation tool if it was you would just throw the imbibing cup in the falls it is about the material and the vessel that carries it. It is a rite of passage not just superstitious mumbo jumbo. For the viewer of the movie to consider it smj is to miss the point of the story, this is about an Engineered nuts and bolts creation. Obviously there will always be smart asses that no everything about creation and say it doesn't hold up as a plausible idea but this is provocative entertainment which is intended to make you think not a NASA dissertation.

In closing there are lots of reasons why Prometheus is an exceptional movie which will grow its cult status but there are many reasons why it fails with people and not least because its prime method of communication is thematic and symbolic which doesn't fit the fanbase or the modern audiences preoccupation with bit by bit detail over suspension.

OK. I look forward to reading it, Michelle.

@ignorantGuy

I didn't use the term "why would you make monsters" the guy from Fox did. It was his short hand for explaining Prometheus to himself and how to sell it. What I think is much more fertile territory is to look at why evil exists in an Intelligent Universe and what can go wrong. As Jon Spaiht's said the monsters simply signify the danger the Engineers can represent. Something had gone wrong already because the danger was to themselves as well. 

The real issue is a part of humanity, represented by Elizabeth, tends to think that morality is the consequence of the benign circumstances in which we were created. What this story is capable of asking us to think about is can there be morality and dare I say love in an engineered universe. In Foxes terms do all robots have to be bad. 

In this story we were going to be destroyed 2,000 years ago but we were actually saved, coincidence? Important? If it were important then that suggests someone is at least interested if not benignly supportive and yet its an intelligent universe where everything is a construction one way or another. How would a God of an Engineered Universe respond to rebellion, its happened, how do you put it right?

So we now have three questions.

How does an Engineered Universe go wrong?

How would the powers respond ?

How would you put it right?  

@Michelle Johnston what I was saying (maybe not very clearly) the provided information (David) can also respond to that question and some argue that Prometheus was always about David. And Because of Fassbender play always an @-hole is very unlikely someone from Fox would want anything else than an evil robot. 

@ignorantGuy

I am sure you won't find this response censorious if I say I only want in this thread to discuss Prometheus and its associated materials up to the day it was released in July 2012. 

So we have a savvy woman the sole survivor and a humbled robot. The only credible way to take the story forward is that David responds to Elizabeths decision to show him more kindness than anyone else by being affected. Anything else lacks coherence and would ignore the basic rules of drama.

I will permit myself one "fall" that "Furious Gods" repeatedly reminds the viewer of the kind of movie that Ridley was desperate to avoid making. Over and over again he talks of being fresh of moving to new ground of fresh takes on everything. I won't insult you by asking you to think about how that relates to the 20th Century Fox movie from 2017 set in the same universe.

What gives me huge joy and excitement is to know I did not project my view of what Prometheus was "all about" its there for all to see in 420 minutes of material. What you as a highly intelligent articulate person seeking fresh experiences can be reassured by is that at least three key people Fassbender, Scott and Lindelof were well aware they were taking a risk. They knew the vocal core fanbase much better than the core fanbase and their U Tube diatribes know the movie and what it was trying to do.    

@Michelle Johnston I'm sorry to have divagated from the original post. But for me, Covenant cannot be unseen and that from those 3 only Lindelof had the spine to not cave-in also says much. Scott was with the sequel only a businessman and Fassbender wanted his own franchise, so I cannot sympathize with either.

But I am really happy for you, none the less.