Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

Started by Darkness, Nov 01, 2006, 08:18:10 AM

Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

Human
393 (59.6%)
Android
266 (40.4%)

Total Members Voted: 609

Author
Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android? (Read 361,303 times)

maledoro

Quote from: Daunty on Aug 25, 2007, 10:48:12 PM
It's always gonna be a human to me. The ending of Alien³ was so cool with the cameo of Lance Henriksen and made it more exciting when he got his injury.
But clearly if you look at AvP the Bishop in Alien³ has to be an andriod. I wouldn't mind him being an android in the third one, but AvP didn't do justice to the franchise so i'm sticking with the original idea. Bishop is a human in the third one.
I "clearly" looked at both Alien³ and AVP and still wasn't confused by his appearances nor did I question his status as a human.

Mr. Weyland

I never thought it messed with the continuity, he human in AVP but if he's a human in Alien 3 he's human, but if he's an android he's an android.

If human, he's either a descendant of Charles Weyland or a look alike who was chosen by the company to talk to Ripley.

If he's an android he must have some kind of modifications to have red blood.

We might never have this question truly answered without another movie, we can only hope that there will be a movie one day with the answers but I am not holding my breath  :-\ 

The Chibi Kiriyama

The only place I've ever heard even the insinuation that he was an android was a brief comment (I believe on Lance Henriksen's part) that was made out of confusion more than anything else. Everything else- the Quadrilogy commentary, the red blood pouring out of the wound, the wound itself, Bishop II's loud statement that he was human- all points to him being human. What happened in AVP as far as Weyland and his appearance is inconsequential to me as far as the facts behind Alien 3.

AVP was a continuity nightmare to begin with. While finding explanations for disasters is a natural facet of human nature, this is one conundrum not worth the philosophical debate.

maledoro

Quote from: Mr. Weyland on Aug 26, 2007, 02:35:30 AM
We might never have this question truly answered without another movie, we can only hope that there will be a movie one day with the answers but I am not holding my breath  :-\ 
It was never a question to begin with. Anderson f**ked up and some people made an assumption.

I've read Michael Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things and he gives several reasons why they do. Not all of them apply to those who believed that Bishop's creator was an android, but here are a couple of reasons that may apply:
QuoteCredo Consolans. More than any other, the reason why people believe weird things is because they want to. It feels good. It is comforting. It is consoling.

Simplicity. Immediate gratification of one's beliefs is all the made easier by simple explanations for an often complex and contingent world. Good and bad things happen to both good and bad people, seemingly at random. Scientific explanations are often complicated and require training and effort to work through.

Karl

Karl

#439
Now, i don't want to be slapped in the face, but I choose to believe that Bishop II is an android. His injury seemed too severe for him to be anything but a droid (This is really the case when moviemakers intend one thing, but it looks like something else).  Everyhting that comes out of the Company's mouhtpiece is a lie. So what I'm saying is, I like the idea if him being a robot even if he is actually human, I just like the idea.

maledoro

Quote from: Karl on Aug 28, 2007, 11:58:10 AM
Now, i don't want to be slapped in the face, but I choose to believe that Bishop II is an android. His injury seemed too severe for him to be anything but a droid
One more time: it wasn't that severe. People have endured worse without even being aware of it.

Quote from: Karl on Aug 28, 2007, 11:58:10 AM
(This is really the case when moviemakers intend one thing, but it looks like something else).
If one knows of the intention, then they should honor it.

Quote from: Karl on Aug 28, 2007, 11:58:10 AM
Everyhting that comes out of the Company's mouhtpiece is a lie. So what I'm saying is, I like the idea if him being a robot even if he is actually human, I just like the idea.
I like the plaid sky outside my window. I just like that sky...

Karl

Karl

#441
 :D  You shouldn't take this Bishop business so seriously lol  ;)

maledoro

Quote from: Karl on Aug 28, 2007, 03:50:20 PM
:D  You shouldn't take this Bishop business so seriously lol  ;)
It's not the "Bishop" side of it, it's what's behind it. I get uneasy when people start to believe things just because it makes them feel good, and no other reason why.

A while ago, a girl had admitted to me that she had voted for George W. Bush. I asked her why. She answered, "Oh, I don't know. I just like him." Later on, she was bitching about some things that he was responsible for but couldn't accept that he was the root of her troubles.

Karl

Karl

#443
Ugh, whatever, it's a science fiction movie we're talking about here. It's no the same.

SM

SM

#444
Quote(This is really the case when moviemakers intend one thing, but it looks like something else). 

No it's really a case of people watching a film but not paying attention.

maledoro

Quote from: Karl on Aug 28, 2007, 05:14:52 PM
Ugh, whatever, it's a science fiction movie we're talking about here. It's no the same.
Again, it's the same thought process.

Karl

Karl

#446
Quote from: SM on Aug 29, 2007, 12:57:33 AM
Quote(This is really the case when moviemakers intend one thing, but it looks like something else). 

No it's really a case of people watching a film but not paying attention.

If the filmmakers had said that yes, he is an android, people would be telling a different story here. It had nothing to do with people (me I guess) not paying attention. And maledoro, stop your BS, just stop it. You've been in this topic like a damn looney slapping your "essay" into other people's faces. Fine, he's a human, happy now? Oh nowait.., .I'm still not really sure he is, maybe I should read your "essay" again.

Fitzley

Those that worked on the film said that he is human. That should be enough to end it right there. Maybe you should read his essay again, its well thought out and a reasoned argument...which is more than I've seen for the android argument.

Cellien

Maybe they made him appear more human since they new Ripley didn't much trust androids.. (though she obviously gained trust after the Bishop in Aliens - THOUGH at the same time, Weyland industries didn't know she had developed a trust for Bishop.).. Tough call, but since he was in AvP as a human... unless he was cloned sometime during the years, I'd have to go with android.

Karl

Karl

#449
Read his "essay". Cloning is illegal lol.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News