Ridley Scott directed the first Alien movie, and it's painfully obvious he was trying to recreate that success in Prometheus. He even used his Alien designer, H.R. Giger. I did like the look of the movie, but then I've long admired Giger's "biomechanic" work, even before Alien was released. But that was the only thing I liked in Prometheus, tempered slightly by the fact I'd seen much of it in the earlier movies.

I left the theater thinking of sending a nasty letter to Roger Ebert for writing a rave review of the movie. But then I had second thoughts: did he really write it? Could Ebert's health problems be causing him to farm out some reviews to other writers? In retrospect, the review didn't sound like Ebert -- not exactly na´ve, but too easily accepting, somehow. Ebert would have spotted all those borrowed elements, wouldn't he? A couple of times in the review, a sentence appeared saying Prometheus was not Aliens...why? Denying the borrowings? The word "thought-provoking" was used -- whaaaat? Because the characters wondered where we came from? As if no one had ever thought that before?

Or maybe I'm just talking through my hat. Would someone else please read the review and tell me what you think?

Ebert's review