Quote from: RakaiThwei on Aug 18, 2015, 02:13:58 AM
Wait... what?
First it's a retcon, then it's not a retcon, then it's a retcon again, now it's not a retcon again? The hell is going on?
Read the article this thread links to:
Quote...not sure if Biehn's assertions about it ignoring 3 & 4 are accurate. It's basically far too early to tell on that front right now.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 18, 2015, 01:26:09 PM
The "big bad company" is also a recurring motif in all three of Blomkamp's films. In District 9 we had the MNU, in Elysium it was Armadyne and in Chappie it was Tetravaal. All three of those companies were involved in weapons manufacturing and research and they all had an individual or individuals with questionable morals just like Weyland Yutani.
Part of what I liked about '
Chappie' was that it
didn't go down that road. Weaver's character was in charge of the company and simply came across as pragmatic. It was a rogue employee within the company who was the villainous element, not the company, itself. I would like to think that's where we'd be with this.
That's how the first of the AVP films represented Weyland. Much less predictable than the '
Prometheus' interpretation of the company just being evil for the heck of it.
Burke was a good representation of that: Vested self-interest. It plays well into the proverb about roads to hell being paved with good intentions.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Aug 18, 2015, 07:54:27 PM
That's how the first of the AVP films represented Weyland. Much less predictable than the 'Prometheus' interpretation of the company just being evil for the heck of it.
How exactly did Prometheus show the company as
evil? :-\
Peter Weyland, the founder and CEO had no qualms about shooting an unarmed and injured woman. His lackeys were also just blindly following his orders, ergo stereotypical evil company.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 18, 2015, 08:38:03 PM
Peter Weyland, the founder and CEO had no qualms about shooting an unarmed and injured woman. His lackeys were also just blindly following his orders, ergo stereotypical evil company.
No offense but if I was just awakened with 2 days of life remaining and just spent a trillion dollars to talk to an alien I'd probably shoot the bitch myself for interrupting. Still that is just the CEO, from Vickers earlier speech it sounds like the rest of the board wasn't too keen on Wylands fishing expedition.
On topic I'm glad that Prometheus 2 is likely to happen first. I seriously want to see that sequel a lot more than alien 5. Also as others have already said, the extra time is a good thing. It does allow more time to write a coherent script that is not similar to that ACM video game... or to any of Bloomkamps other movies. Truthfully none of his movies have any staying power; translate that into rewatchability.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 18, 2015, 08:38:03 PM
Peter Weyland, the founder and CEO had no qualms about shooting an unarmed and injured woman. His lackeys were also just blindly following his orders, ergo stereotypical evil company.
Still, not the entire company. Just the CEO and a couple of loyal men willing to go on a 4 year mission with him.
Seriously, they've gotta drop this 'evil company' motif. It resonated beautifully in the yuppie-era 80's, but at this point it's just so tired, and so expected.
Company's been evil since the 70s. Though Dan O'Bannon referred to Ash's character as the Russian Spy so there was a Cold War motif in the first Alien, from his point of view (he didn't approve of the idea of Ash, even though he thought Ian Holm killed it in the role). The yuppie 80s thing was more Paul Riser's character from Aliens.
I didn't see the company as strictly evil in Alien, though, now that I think about it. Ash was crazy enough but the company itself seemed indifferent. Things are rough for its employees, for sure, but it's not literally standing over them with a whip, either. More often than not, the employees do more harm to themselves once the Alien is lose than the company does.
But I tend to categorize evil as "direct, sadistic or cruel, voluntary action." This seems apropos for the Alien, but according to Ash, it is unclouded by "delusions of morality." It's just a killing machine. If the alien really is just a weapon, then it is neither good nor evil. I saw a horror film called The Guest where the character was programmed to be the perfect soldier. Once his directives crossed over into "kill territory" he couldn't stop himself. There was no choice involved. Neither was the Alien really choosing to do what it did.
The company probably had a choice, but there's such a huge disconnect. It isn't really one person, and the choices made by whatever committee dictated Ash's special order probably had never met Dallas or his crew. And they were all contracted, so who knows where they all came from before the Company picked them up. To the Company, Dallas and the other crew members of the Nostromo were just, as Dillan told Dutch, "expendable assets." Does that make the Company evil? How can it strictly be evil if the people it's harming it never sees?
Quote from: NickisSmart on Aug 18, 2015, 10:23:40 PM
Company's been evil since the 70s. Though Dan O'Bannon referred to Ash's character as the Russian Spy so there was a Cold War motif in the first Alien, from his point of view (he didn't approve of the idea of Ash, even though he thought Ian Holm killed it in the role). The yuppie 80s thing was more Paul Riser's character from Aliens.
I didn't see the company as strictly evil in Alien, though, now that I think about it. Ash was crazy enough but the company itself seemed indifferent. Things are rough for its employees, for sure, but it's not literally standing over them with a whip, either. More often than not, the employees do more harm to themselves once the Alien is lose than the company does.
But I tend to categorize evil as "direct, sadistic or cruel, voluntary action." This seems apropos for the Alien, but according to Ash, it is unclouded by "delusions of morality." It's just a killing machine. If the alien really is just a weapon, then it is neither good nor evil. I saw a horror film called The Guest where the character was programmed to be the perfect soldier. Once his directives crossed over into "kill territory" he couldn't stop himself. There was no choice involved. Neither was the Alien really choosing to do what it did.
The company probably had a choice, but there's such a huge disconnect. It isn't really one person, and the choices made by whatever committee dictated Ash's special order probably had never met Dallas or his crew. And they were all contracted, so who knows where they all came from before the Company picked them up. To the Company, Dallas and the other crew members of the Nostromo were just, as Dillan told Dutch, "expendable assets." Does that make the Company evil? How can it strictly be evil if the people it's harming it never sees?
I think you're agreeing with me here, though it doesn't sound like that's your intent. In Alien, the company (or whoever within the company put SO 937 into motion) wasn't evil - just callous and opportunistic. "Hmm, there might be something of interest over there, let's send these chumps out that way and see if they come up with something."
It was only in Aliens that corporate 'evil' took centre stage, and at the time, we all applauded it. These were the days when anyone with a mobile phone was a yuppie douchebag, and we all rejoiced when Burke got his comeuppance. But by the 3rd and 4th films, WY and USM were little more than moustache-twirling villains, and of course we've seen it repeated again and again in other sci-fi/action films.
It's getting as tired as 'one of us is secretly a robot!' in my opinion, and it's got to go. Get back to the creature! ;D
@Clemens: Just playing with ideas. I don't think anyone is right when it comes to interpretation. : )
One reason why I liked Prometheus, was because David was blatantly an android. There was no secrecy behind it. Though I guess the idea was that there was a second android was Ridley Scott jokingly saying that there might be two. But Prometheus was so truncated that I just didn't see it really suggested much in the film. As for the evil company. Well, again, the film had a lot of ideas that weren't fully developed and the evil company motif wasn't very developed in the film.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 18, 2015, 09:56:33 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 18, 2015, 08:38:03 PM
Peter Weyland, the founder and CEO had no qualms about shooting an unarmed and injured woman. His lackeys were also just blindly following his orders, ergo stereotypical evil company.
Still, not the entire company. Just the CEO and a couple of loyal men willing to go on a 4 year mission with him.
The CEO is the face of the company though. When the president of the United States says or does something it is seen as representative of the entire nation. Not everyone might agree with him but people will still tend to judge the nation based on his actions and words.
The rest of the company seen in Prometheus wasn't really nice people (or robots) either.
Vickers (a senior company executive) torched a man alive who may or may not have had an infectious disease when he could have been safely quarantined aboard the lifeboat. While David, the company's butler was happily using the hired help as guinea pigs.
Quote from: tmjhur on Aug 19, 2015, 12:32:38 PM
http://i60.tinypic.com/nbsowy.png
Interesting... so BD was talking bollocks?
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 12:35:57 PMVickers (a senior company executive) torched a man alive who may or may not have had an infectious disease when he could have been safely quarantined aboard the lifeboat.
Vickers pleaded with him to stop. You make it sound like she just opened up the first chance she got like a heartless bitch. She's clearly pretty traumatised by what happens in the film (although admittedly Scoot decided to cut the great scene that really showed this).
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 12:40:20 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 12:35:57 PMVickers (a senior company executive) torched a man alive who may or may not have had an infectious disease when he could have been safely quarantined aboard the lifeboat.
Vickers pleaded with him to stop. You make it sound like she just opened up the first chance she got like a heartless bitch. She's clearly pretty traumatised by what happens in the film (although admittedly Scoot decided to cut the great scene that really showed this).
Holloway wasn't a threat. He didn't attack Vickers and both were safely sealed inside their suits with no risk of cross infection.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 12:40:20 PMScoot
:laugh:
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:00:46 PMHolloway wasn't a threat. He didn't attack Vickers and both were safely sealed inside their suits with no risk of cross infection.
How do they know he wasn't a threat? They have literally no clue what he's been infected with, only that it's likely some pretty horrendous alien virus or agent. Given what happened to Fifield later, Christ only knows what Holloway could've done, but even without that hindsight it's not unreasonable to think they wouldn't risk taking the chance.
But regardless, the implication of the scene is quite obviously that Holloway forced her into it. Your reading that it makes her seem "evil" is just way off the charts, I've no idea where you got that from.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:00:46 PMScoot
:laugh:
Whoops...
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:00:46 PMHolloway wasn't a threat. He didn't attack Vickers and both were safely sealed inside their suits with no risk of cross infection.
How do they know he wasn't a threat? They have literally no clue what he's been infected with, only that it's likely some pretty horrendous alien virus or agent. Given what happened to Fifield later, Christ only knows what Holloway could've done, but even without that hindsight it's not unreasonable to think they wouldn't risk taking the chance.
But regardless, the implication of the scene is quite obviously that Holloway forced her into it. Your reading that it makes her seem "evil" is just way off the charts, I've no idea where you got that from.
No-one knew if he was dangerous but the rest of the crew wanted to help Holloway. Vickers wanted him left outside without any hope of medical attention.
Granted, Ripley was in the same position in Alien and her actions while certainly cold were not necessarily evil.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:17:09 PMGranted, Ripley was in the same position in Alien and her actions while certainly cold were not necessarily evil.
Exactly. So why does the exact same scenario automatically make Vickers evil?
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:17:09 PMGranted, Ripley was in the same position in Alien and her actions while certainly cold were not necessarily evil.
Exactly. So why does the exact same scenario automatically make Vickers evil?
Vickers killed a man, Ripley didn't.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:45:24 PMVickers killed a man, Ripley didn't.
Guess you totally missed the bit where Vickers was literally begging and pleading with Holloway to stop, and how Holloway kept advancing and telling her to "do it", and how Vickers didn't fire until Holloway deliberately crossed the threshold and gave her no choice.
Plus, Ripley had an airlock stopping the nasty from getting on board. Vickers didn't.
Seriously, Holloway clearly forced her to kill him. She's hardly a malevolent murdering psychopath. I honestly don't know how you could read that from the scene.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 01:55:15 PM
Plus, Ripley had an airlock stopping the nasty from getting on board. Vickers didn't.
But Ripley didn't torch Kane after Ash let him in.
Which also begs the question, why did Vickers open the airlock and pick up an incinerator unit when she could just have refused to open the airlock in the first place?
Vickers was ruthless and pragmatic (I always got the sense that her situation was meant to have been a 'what if' of Ripley having stood her ground and refusing to let Kane in). Not evil. Weyland, however, is shown to be egomaniacal and the type to want everything under his total control. He isn't the common sense type of Weyland who was merely understandably ambitious, as shown in the first of the AVP films. The company is more likely to be an extension of 'Prometheus'-flavoured Weyland's will.
And he's the guy who told David 8 to infect Holloway for shits and giggles - that was what placed him firmly in the 'evil' camp. There wasn't anything realistic which could have been gained from that. David 8 would have been much more likely to have yielded useful results by just continuing to test the stuff in the laboratory. No reason a small blood sample of Weyland's own human tissue/blood couldn't have been used on it.
The kind of Weyland we got in the first AVP film was more of a relateable figure and less of an 'evil Capitalist' stereotype, in the same way as Sigourney Weaver's character in 'Chappie' was. The latter gives me some hope that the upcoming film might go down such a road, which is infinitely preferable.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:45:24 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 01:17:09 PMGranted, Ripley was in the same position in Alien and her actions while certainly cold were not necessarily evil.
Exactly. So why does the exact same scenario automatically make Vickers evil?
Vickers killed a man, Ripley didn't.
If Ash wasn't there to break the line of command Ripley would have kept them in the airlock. Thus Kane = dead.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 02:00:57 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 19, 2015, 01:55:15 PM
Plus, Ripley had an airlock stopping the nasty from getting on board. Vickers didn't.
But Ripley didn't torch Kane after Ash let him in.
As soon as Dallas was back on board he's in command. I'm not saying she would have torched Kane, at that time Ripley had no idea what was going to happen. For Vickers she's in command of the mission and ordered everyone on the ship. She only holds the flamethrower to keep Holloway at bay until everyone is back onboard (as she's tells them to) but Holloway keeps advancing and says "do it". So she torches him.
Vickers is not evil.
Yeah, AvP Weyland is a far better character than Prometheus Weyland.
The speech that was not even in the film, you mean?
Quote from: Omegamorph on Aug 19, 2015, 05:18:32 PM
Yeah, AvP Weyland is a far better character than Prometheus Weyland.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FHF5Bexdy2qe88%2Fgiphy.gif&hash=7f8ad9aba0b72d568f23f8d2d4d0ab95ca02a267)
I agree with this.. Omegamorph, thank you for making me smile.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 19, 2015, 05:45:56 PM
This speech disagrees.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQpGwnN3dfc
I absolutely loved this promo. It was a shame we didn't see more of this Weyland in Prometheus.
Hopefully this promo makes it into an edit of the film someday...along with some of the other ones...
I own the Agent 9 fan edit on DVD which has the movie open with this, replacing the Engineer drinking on the waterfall.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Aug 19, 2015, 07:18:53 PM
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 19, 2015, 05:45:56 PM
This speech disagrees.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQpGwnN3dfc
I absolutely loved this promo. It was a shame we didn't see more of this Weyland in Prometheus.
I did, as well. Especially the extended version of it.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 19, 2015, 08:01:53 PM
I own the Agent 9 fan edit on DVD which has the movie open with this, replacing the Engineer drinking on the waterfall.
I would be very curious to see that someday. Is the policy of this website such that I can't request hints on where to find it? Anyone?
I emailed the dude and he sent me a DVD copy.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 19, 2015, 08:38:31 PM
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 19, 2015, 08:01:53 PM
I own the Agent 9 fan edit on DVD which has the movie open with this, replacing the Engineer drinking on the waterfall.
I would be very curious to see that someday. Is the policy of this website such that I can't request hints on where to find it? Anyone?
By all means. We support fan edits.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Aug 19, 2015, 03:49:29 PMAnd he's the guy who told David 8 to infect Holloway for shits and giggles - that was what placed him firmly in the 'evil' camp.
Wait... when did this happen? I don't remember David being told to "infect" Holloway in the movie...
That was what the conversation with Weyland in his cryosleep chamber was meant to have been.
"Try harder." Remember? Wink, wink.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 20, 2015, 12:08:28 AM
"Try harder." Remember? Wink, wink.
"Try Harder" is what David interprets as
see what happens if someone ingests it. His robot mind is figuring it out independently. Hence the trick he pulls on Holloway to inadvertently let Charlie give David the permission to infect him.
"What would you do?"
"Anything and everything."This is going off track though. The original conversation was about whether the company is evil or not?
I'm in the camp which believes that Weyland Yutani must be doing some things right because they've conquered space and other worlds. However for the purpose of story-telling we (as the audience) see moments where sections of the company pull immoral acts.
Just to go back to this...
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 12:35:57 PM
The CEO is the face of the company though. When the president of the United States says or does something it is seen as representative of the entire nation. Not everyone might agree with him but people will still tend to judge the nation based on his actions and words.
That is why wars break out. Because everyone bows or judges to a leader of a country without thinking of the broader picture. Personally I don't look at Australia, or China and judge the entire country on one, or a handful of individuals, and I don't for a fictional company in a science fiction series either.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 20, 2015, 08:16:56 AM
This is going off track though. The original conversation was about whether the company is evil or not?
No, this thread is about whether Prometheus 2 is holding up Alien 5. It might be best to stop the discussion about Weyland Corp or continue it in the Prometheus sub-forum. :)
QuoteI'm in the camp which believes that Weyland Yutani must be doing some things right because they've conquered space and other worlds. However for the purpose of story-telling we (as the audience) see moments where sections of the company pull immoral acts.
Nazi Germany must have been doing some things right because they conquered Europe and half of Asia and Northern Africa.
I'll split it off when I get chance.
Done.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 20, 2015, 12:33:32 PM
Nazi Germany must have been doing some things right because they conquered Europe and half of Asia and Northern Africa.
I'm pretty sure theres a few things different between Nazi Germany and Weyland Yutani :laugh:
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Aug 20, 2015, 01:19:16 PM
Done.
Cheers Corporal!
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 20, 2015, 02:57:54 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 20, 2015, 12:33:32 PM
Nazi Germany must have been doing some things right because they conquered Europe and half of Asia and Northern Africa.
I'm pretty sure theres a few things different between Nazi Germany and Weyland Yutani :laugh:
Probably very similar situation. Most Germans during WWII were decent people much like they are today. Unfortunately their leaders were mostly a bunch of evil keneevals and that is why most of the world today perceives the Third Reich as evil. But my point was that you don't have to be a good guy to succeed. Historically conquerors were never saints.
The Company wasn't portrayed as evil in Aliens. Burke was only a junior executive and just one man so he was hardly a good representation of the Company.
There is also a good case for assuming that the Nostromo in Alien was diverted by one or more rogue individuals within the Company.
But by Alien 3 the Company has seemingly started its transformation into a bunch of mustache twirling baddies. Prometheus ups the ante by making the CEO himself a very nasty person. The rest of the Company in Prometheus aren't portrayed as very nice people either. In the EU and games W-Y is also almost always portrayed as bad guys.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 20, 2015, 08:16:56 AM
"Try Harder" is what David interprets as see what happens if someone ingests it. His robot mind is figuring it out independently. Hence the trick he pulls on Holloway to inadvertently let Charlie give David the permission to infect him.
Not quite, according to Lindelof:
QuoteIn the scene preceding him doing that, he is talking to Weyland (although we don't know it at the time) and he's telling Weyland that this is a bust. That they haven't found anything on this mission other than the stuff in the vials. And Weyland presumably says to him, "Well, what's in the vials?" And David would say, "I'm not entirely sure, we'll have to run some experiments." And Weyland would say, "What would happen if you put it in inside a person?" And David would say, "I don't know, I'll go find out." He doesn't know that he's poisoning Holloway, he asks Holloway, "What would you be willing to do to get the answers to your questions?" Holloway says, "Anything and everything." And that basically overrides whatever ethical programming David is mandated by, [allowing him] to spike his drink.
http://io9.com/5917448/all-of-your-lingering-prometheus-questions-answered
David 8 might be accused of extremely broad interpretation, but Weyland would have known "I'll go and find out" means someone on the crew isn't going to have a good day.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 20, 2015, 03:36:13 PM
Probably very similar situation. Most Germans during WWII were decent people much like they are today. Unfortunately their leaders were mostly a bunch of evil keneevals and that is why most of the world today perceives the Third Reich as evil. But my point was that you don't have to be a good guy to succeed. Historically conquerors were never saints.
The Company wasn't portrayed as evil in Aliens. Burke was only a junior executive and just one man so he was hardly a good representation of the Company.
The thing is that that is what is important to most people. There's too many people who aren't able to look past the surface of a situation or take other elements/people into consideration. It's human nature. So to us Ash/Order is supposed to be the Company in Alien, Burke is supposed to be the Company in Aliens so we're judging it on the actions of those representatives. Is that intentional? I certainly expect so.
And to go slightly off the side, The Weyland-Yutani Report is making it blatantly obvious that Burke was informing his superiors of everything so they did know.
This is also the same company which allowed families to flourish and help establish new planets when terraforming.
I'm fully aware that Burke pretty much set them up by not warning them about the Derelict but for the people on LV-426 it was just another terraforming job. So we must assume that is how it worked for other planets because no one stated anything like "Isn't it nice for once that the company has allowed us to terraform with our families."
That is why I love companies like Weyland Yutani, or InGen from Jurassic Park. They're not necessarily evil but not 100% good. It's what makes them feel more realistic.
It's all about the $$ and defence for them.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Aug 21, 2015, 08:36:59 AM
And to go slightly off the side, The Weyland-Yutani Report is making it blatantly obvious that Burke was informing his superiors of everything so they did know.
Strange, because the film always seemed to suggest that Burke was acting alone.
QuoteRipley: I just checked the colony log. Dated 0-6-1-2-7-9, signed Burke, Carter J. You sent them out there and you didn't even warn them. Why didn't you warn them, Burke?
Burke: Okay, look. What if that ship didn't even exist, huh? Did you ever think about that? I didn't know! So now, if I went in and made a major security issue out of it, everybody steps in. Administration steps in, and there are no exclusive rights for anybody; nobody wins. So I made a decision and it was... wrong. It was a bad call, Ripley, it was a bad call.
Ripley: Bad call?
Ripley: These people are *dead *,Burke! Don't you have any idea what you have done here? Well, I'm gonna make sure they nail you right to the wall for this! You're not gonna sleaze your way out of this one! Right to the wall!
And Ripley were only interested in nailing Burke to the wall, not the rest of the company.
Anyhow, I don't think he could have told them much really since after arriving at LV-426 he had no way of communicating with W-Y. The colony's transmitter was down and I doubt he could have snuck off to the APC in order to phone home.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 21, 2015, 08:56:40 AM
This is also the same company which allowed families to flourish and help establish new planets when terraforming.
I'm fully aware that Burke pretty much set them up by not warning them about the Derelict but for the people on LV-426 it was just another terraforming job. So we must assume that is how it worked for other planets because no one stated anything like "Isn't it nice for once that the company has allowed us to terraform with our families."
That is why I love companies like Weyland Yutani, or InGen from Jurassic Park. They're not necessarily evil but not 100% good. It's what makes them feel more realistic.
It's all about the $$ and defence for them.
The colonies fall under the Colonial Administration so it's not just W-Y that's responsible for their welfare. The long term prospects for LV-426 was mining which is the only reason why W-Y invested all those billions into terraforming the planet. Not out of a sense of altruism.
I'll crack it out again later tonight to get the specifics of his interaction. I was going to reply "I didn't mean on the fly" but then I remember something about him sending a report about his intentions to infect Ripley and Newt. I'll double check and get back to you after I get home from work.
Good point, Eighth Passenger. I hadn't known it was making out Burke to have been in communication, but if it does, that doesn't make sense.
One aspect i liked about AvP was that they didn't follow the evil company meme with Charles Weyland being a goodguy.
Quote from: Alien³ on Aug 20, 2015, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 19, 2015, 12:35:57 PM
The CEO is the face of the company though. When the president of the United States says or does something it is seen as representative of the entire nation. Not everyone might agree with him but people will still tend to judge the nation based on his actions and words.
That is why wars break out. Because everyone bows or judges to a leader of a country without thinking of the broader picture. Personally I don't look at Australia, or China and judge the entire country on one, or a handful of individuals, and I don't for a fictional company in a science fiction series either.
Anyone whom believes likewise just comes off as naive; good on you. :)
As for Weyland Yutani being an evil company; what company isn't? Business is pragmatic not morally ethical; primal in nature with complex motives. It's like calling a spider evil for catching a butterfly and eating it.