Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

[xeno_alpha_07]

The credits did not say Bishop's Designer or Bishop's Developer. They flat out said Bishop II

And?

There's a credit for "Unlucky Bastard" in The Lost World: Jurassic Park and anyone who only had one line of dialogue in a Naked Gun movie was credit with their line.

Bishop II comes from the script, which was written to make it clear he wasn't an android. They didn't bother coming up with a new name or throwing on another word to the end because he has all of five minutes of screentime.

Also, look at the actor Hi Ching:



He's credited as just 'Company Man'.  And his screen time was slighty longer than Bisop II.

[SM]

Check his birth certificate - it says 'Man Company'.  What with him being Chinese and all.

[Self-Destruct]

My argument remains the same: For such a pivotal character, they would have come outright and said he was an android and it wouldn't be left to speculation.

[Waldo]

My argument remains the same: For such a pivotal character, they would have come outright and said he was an android and it wouldn't be left to speculation.

Yeah, because no science fiction movie would ever do that.

[SpaceMarines]

They would've at least given strong hints that he might be an android, a la Blade Runner. In this, they went out of their way so that you knew he was human.

[NUB DESTROYER]

They would've at least given strong hints that he might be an android, a la Blade Runner. In this, they went out of their way so that you knew he was human.

The irony of this is that Ridley has gone on record to say Deckard is a replicant.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/825641.stm

:/

EDIT:  Curiously many still think he's human  http://www.bladezone.com/community/viewforum.php?f=9

[SpaceMarines]

They would've at least given strong hints that he might be an android, a la Blade Runner. In this, they went out of their way so that you knew he was human.

The irony of this is that Ridley has gone on record to say Deckard is a replicant.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/825641.stm

:/

EDIT:  Curiously many still think he's human  http://www.bladezone.com/community/viewforum.php?f=9

And Ford says that he's human, and really, it could go either way. There was deliberate ambiguity left in that film.

[NUB DESTROYER]

If you don't think Deckard is a Replicant, Sir Ridley Scott thinks you're a moron.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20166134,00.html

[alienfan95610]

If you don't think Deckard is a Replicant, Sir Ridley Scott thinks you're a moron.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20166134,00.html

That.

[StrangeShape]

They would've at least given strong hints that he might be an android, a la Blade Runner. In this, they went out of their way so that you knew he was human.

And I think they did give a strong hint by him by surprise in the head with a metal pipe and having piece of his face hangihng off of him like from a droid or terminator. That and none of his surgeons and techs giving a sligh crap about someone who suppose to be an important designer/big shot

[Vulhala]

Whoever said he was a bigshot?

[NUB DESTROYER]

(Bishop II) having piece of his face hangihng off of him like from a droid or terminator.

It wasn't hanging and that was exactly my point.

[alienfan95610]

Whoever said he was a bigshot?

The movie itself does, being as he's the one, and only one, that speaks to Ripley....

[NUB DESTROYER]

f**k

[Kel G 426]

none of his surgeons and techs giving a sligh crap

There were surgeons and techs present?  I saw a company man and a guy with a camera.  Everyone else had guns, I thought.