1) And this was my big problem with Prometheus, too: I cannot believe, I simply cannot stop myself from disbelieving that there would not be an *extremely* rigorous process to weed out people who buckle under pressure, people who have their own agenda, people who will not put the mission first, etc. Instead we've got movies where regular people seem to be thrown together in a tin can millions of miles from Earth, and then their personalities start dictating how the movie goes. I cannot believe, especially for missions so terribly vital, that they would not be EXTREMELY selective in who they send. Why would we have a therapist obsessed with the sun to the point where he's sunburning himself? Why would we have a second-in-command who puts himself above the mission? The only character in this movie that I really bought was Mace.
No matter how well-planned the mission or how well-selected the crew, the fact is that prior to the Icarus I mission, they’d never before had to send eight people on a three-year round trip to drop a giant nuke into the sun, with the fate of all mankind hanging in the balance. There was no way of predicting what kind of toll that would take on even the strongest minds, but the fact that the ship has a psychiatrist instead of a physician suggests that they knew it was going to be a stressful gig. And they didn’t know what had happened to Icarus I when they sent Icarus II, otherwise they might have approached things differently.
It’s also worth noting that they’ve been on board for sixteen months already when we meet them, so whatever toll the mission might take on them, it’s already well underway. It’s a safe bet they were all very different people when they left Earth.
2) I don't think they ever adequately address their decision to divert to the Iracus I. Sure, I get that a second chance at delivering a payload is seductive. But is there any particular reason why they endangered their primary mission by diverting instead of delivering their payload FIRST, then going for the Icarus I if it didn't work?
”Two last chances are better than one,” addressed it quite neatly. As for why they didn’t “deliver their payload first, then go back” - was the ship even capable of doing that? It was essentially a delivery vehicle designed to fly straight to the sun, drop the payload, and then reverse back to Earth with the crew. They made a course adjustment to rendezvous with Icarus I (which was probably originally on the same course as they were) but it’s never suggested that they can just chuck a three-point turn, drive back to the Icarus I, and
then go back to the sun again. They’re not on the
USS Enterprise.
3) Things start going wrong when Trey makes a heinous mistake in not adjusting the shields after entering their course correction. I won't even go into how unlikely it is that he would forget something so important. Human error definitely exists. But I can't believe there wouldn't be an automated failsafe that would prevent that from happening. Icraus II is so intelligent that it can detect five living humans when there should be four, and it can override Cassie when it feels the mission is in jeopardy. I can't believe they'd leave something like sun-shielding to chance.
You’re putting a lot of faith in automated systems and failsafes, especially ones meant to compensate for situations the designers probably wouldn’t predict. They were never
meant to change course, so why would anyone assume that the ship would need to account for a course change? It can tell there are five people on board, but assumes the fifth is just another "crew member" and doesn’t think to bring it up until Capa accidentally stumbles across the fact himself, which casts serious doubt on how “intelligent” or independent it is - it was just processing the information it was asked to process at the time, and responding to the questions it was asked. It overrides Cassie when the crew’s meddling with its normal routines leads to a major disaster on board, but a slight shift in shield alignment due to a new course - which didn’t actually cause a problem until hours or days later - apparently just wasn’t in its programming to detect or try to address.
4) When they make it over to Icarus I, they comment on all of the dust. One of the crew members says dust is mostly human skin. Which is A) incorrect...that is a common myth and B) probably impossible in the amounts they're seeing, even if it were true. Particularly since most of the crew died six and a half years ago and presumably aren't shedding skin cells anymore, and the only living person doesn't seem to have much skin left!
The “dust is mostly human skin” line was clearly the result of bad research on the part of the writer - or maybe he knew it was a myth, but assumed the audience wouldn’t know this, and kept it in because it’s a nicely ominous line, especially given what they find later.
5) While we're on the subject of those dead crew members, and the Searle's fascination with watching the sun through the screen... Why does the screen even have the option of viewing the sun at anything more than 3.1% if it causes irreparable damage? Just seems like another one of those safety features that would've been built in.
It
was built in. The computer warns Searle against viewing the sun at too high a percentage, and - when asked - tells him what percentage will be safe, and for exactly how long. So there’s your safety feature. The crew of the Icarus I figured out a way to shut off their filter completely, but their computer apparently wasn’t running by that point.
6) Pinbacker, the crazy captain of Icarus I: Why did he go crazy? What about that rigorous selection process?
Again, they had no way to predict what would happen to the crew’s mental state in the situation they were in.
Why didn't the crew of Icarus II bother counting bodies?
Well, they only found three. And immediately after finding those, they had a slightly more pressing situation to deal with (ie, not joining them).
How did he survive for seven years? We're supposed to believe that he's *beep* crazy AND sane enough to work the hydroponics section? That he's lost his grip on reality and yet somehow knows how to keep vegetables growing and oxygen flowing and to ration his water?
Does being crazy make you technically inept and unable to perform tasks? Ed Gein was crazy as a fruitbat, and he used to make clothes and furniture out of dead bodies.
How is all of his flesh burnt and he's surely malnourished, and yet he's stronger than every crew member of Icarus II?
Well, he’s stronger than Capa and Cassie. And Corazon, who he ambushes from behind. So, yeah - the 6'2" homicidal maniac who's survived in space for seven years by himself can beat up two average-sized women, and the nerdiest male on the ship. Not that much of a stretch, really.
How does he know the codes to Icarus II? Sure, he'd probably have the knowledge on how to sabotage the ship, but surely the security codes would have changed?
When did anyone mention codes?
How did he get to the Icarus II? Did Icarus II not notice that the airlock had been engaged?
It was never
disengaged. The boarding party just left the airlock attached and open. All he had to do was step through a couple of doors.
How did he violently de-couple the airlocks from *inside* the airlock?
Who said he was “inside the airlock”? The lock was decoupled and the door on the Icarus II side was closed, so clearly he wasn’t.
7) Really? There's only one suit in the airlock on Icarus I? Any particular reason there'd only be one suit on a ship full of seven people or so?
Probably the same reason the computer’s off, the sun filter’s disengaged, the crew are mostly dead and the ship’s not moving.
Any particular reason Kapa couldn't have blown over to Icarus II, picked up a new suit, blown it back over there for someone? Or towed over an extra? Any reason they couldn't have just kept doing that until they got transferred?
"Shuttle back with more suits? The airlock is ripped in half! Once we break that seal, how are we gonna re-pressurize?"
8) I realize that the mainframe is probably meant to be worked on when it's not sitting down in the coolant, but I'd also have to think the designers would understand that perhaps it might become jammed at some point. You'd think they would have, at the very least, included something akin to a dry suit for Mace to wear when he's trying to fix the mainframes after putting them back in the coolant.
Would they, though? Again with the failsafes for situations that were never meant to arise.
reply
share
PiaPuffytail
10 years ago
Weeellll....
I'm gonna just have to flat-out disagree with you on number one. I mean yes, it's no doubt very stressful, and there's no way they could anticipate everyone's state of mind x-amount of months into the mission. But it's not as if people have never been sent on long, perilous missions before. It's not as if there have never been double-agents or submarine crews sent out for months and months at a time. I'm just saying I would expect the process to be extremely rigorous, with most people acting like Mace rather than everyone else being ruled by their emotions. One person cracking, sure, I could believe that. Not multiple people.
Some of your other points have to do with me "putting a lot of faith in automated systems and failsafes, especially ones meant to compensate for situations the designers probably wouldn’t predict."
Um...yeah. I do have a lot of faith in automated failsafes. I don't think that's at all unrealistic. I mean...when I go to empty my recycle bin, Windows asks me if I'm sure I want to permanently delete those items. You cannot convince me this state of the art SPACE SHIP would not have some sort of warning indicating a fatal error was about to be made.
Some of your other "points" aren't really adequate explanations. Bad research doesn't in any way negate my point about the skin / dust. The computer being off, sun filter being disengaged, the crew being dead and the ship not moving still don't account for why there's only one EVA suit on a ship meant for over a half dozen people. My original point was that all of these things lead to me having to suspend too MUCH disbelief. A certain amount is expected, but all of these things combined really took me out of the movie.
Pretty sure you're wrong on the other points, too, but there's no way I'm going back and watching this movie again just fo remember it all clearly, lol.
reply
share
MrRazorz
10 years ago
But it's not as if people have never been sent on long, perilous missions before.
Once again - with the exception of the Icarus I crew (and look what happened there) no other humans in history had ever bent sent on a mission to restart the sun (the physics of which were uncertain anyway, by Capa's own admission) with the knowledge that they were literally mankind's last hope, and that if they failed the entire planet/species would die. Strikes me as a bit more of a weight on the old noodle than a tour of duty on a submarine, and goes a bit beyond what even the most rigorous screening/training process could prepare for.
In fact, considering Pinbacker turned into a crazy god-bothering serial killer and at least half of his crew committed suicide by self-immolation, I'd say the Icarus II crew were holding it together pretty well, all things considered. You said that Searle slow-cooking himself in the observation room was cause for concern (and it is) but it's likely Pinbacker was doing the same thing, and that's what drove him nuts. Yet Searle was, in many ways, the sanest man on the ship. He was certainly the calmest.
The rest of the crew had their breaking points (well, two of them did) but by and large they were coping pretty nicely by comparison, the odd fist-fight notwithstanding. Especially since this time around they didn't have a backup (because they
were the backup).
Um...yeah. I do have a lot of faith in automated failsafes. I don't think that's at all unrealistic. I mean...when I go to empty my recycle bin, Windows asks me if I'm sure I want to permanently delete those items. You cannot convince me this state of the art SPACE SHIP would not have some sort of warning indicating a fatal error was about to be made.
The problem is, you're dreaming up imaginary cure-all failsafes to cover
everything that goes wrong on the ship. It only has the safety features that the designers thought to give it, to cover the situations
they could predict. A slight course change resulting in a slight misalignment of the shield apparently wasn't one of those situations... because why would they ever have to change course? Nor did it occur to them that someone would sabotage the mainframe (you know it was sabotaged and not just "jammed", right?) resulting in one of the crew having to submerge himself in coolant to fix it... because without the knowledge that Icarus I was still out there with a homicidal maniac lurking on it, why would they imagine that situation would ever arise?
Some of your other "points" aren't really adequate explanations.
Well, not if you're just going to disregard the explanations, which is what you did with the last two points. But moving on...
Bad research doesn't in any way negate my point about the skin / dust.
Well, to be honest, your point about the dust was a little confused. You acknowledged that the "dust is human skin" thing is a myth, then went on to question whether there was enough skin on the ship to make that much dust.
The computer being off, sun filter being disengaged, the crew being dead and the ship not moving still don't account for why there's only one EVA suit on a ship meant for over a half dozen people.
What I was getting at is that we don't know exactly what happened on the Icarus I prior to the second crew arriving. All we know is that Pinbacker went nuts and sabotaged the mission. So there could be any number of reasons why there's only one suit left. Maybe Pinbacker chucked the suits out of the airlock to prevent the rest of the crew using them. Maybe some of the crew went out in suits, and Pinbacker stopped them coming back in, or sabotaged the suits so they'd die outside (it's hard to tell how many charred bodies were in the observation room). And how many suits were there on board, anyway? One for each crew member? Waste of space, given that at least two of them would be staying on board at all times.
Point being, you don't have to suspend disbelief over something that's open to interpretation.
Pretty sure you're wrong on the other points, too
Well, as long as you're
pretty sure.
reply
share
PiaPuffytail
10 years ago
Haha, not confused, just more like...nail in the coffin. It was a two-part issue I had with that bit.
One, that even IF the skin thing weren't really a myth, it didn't make sense that there would be so much of it when only one person had existed that whole time, and it looks like he hasn't actually HAD skin in awhile.
And two, of course, that it IS a myth, and it takes me out of it to hear some allegedly very smart people being sent on a very important mission who apparently don't actually know any better.
On the rest, we'll just have to agree to disagree :)
reply
share