Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

[SM]

Please read- He could have had DNA preserved before death-

Yeah and?  What are they supposed to do with it apart from make someone who looks like Weyland - but has none of Weyland's knowledge or expriences.

on the genetic memory thing was it ever established that she got the genetic memory from the Alien?

Please read -

Perez "How does it have memories?"

As Wren hypothesizes "I'm guessing they're passed down generationally like it's strength".  The Alien DNA mix allows her to retain some memories of her former life.

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

If you were able to clone the person responsible for the works of William Shakespeare, you might get the clone interested in perhaps mythology, writing and acting .and he might well be expected to be very successful with this, if it's in the blood so to speak

An awful lot of trouble to go to for an "if".  Besides it's established in the Alien universe that it isn't "in the blood" - Perez "How does it have memories?"

I'm experiencing the idea that you don't realise that I'm talking about this in way that people inheriting talents from their parents and this doesn't have anything to do with inheriting memories from their parents. I don't believe that people in the universe of Alien are supposed to be different from this universe

What's to stop someone simply picking up his work where he left off?  And why wait 100 years to clone him anyway?

Well, in terms of connecting the whole series with the AVP universe, we have only seen one man who is supposed to be taken as a human being, who looks like Charles Weyland

[SM]

I'm experiencing the idea that you don't realise that I'm talking about this in way that people inheriting talents from their parents and this doesn't have anything to do with inheriting memories from their parents.

And yet siblings from the same parents often turn out extremely different.

Well, in terms of connecting the whole series with the AVP universe, we have only seen one man who is supposed to be taken as a human being, who looks like Charles Weyland

...and?  Not sure where you're going with this.

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

I'm experiencing the idea that you don't realise that I'm talking about this in way that people inheriting talents from their parents and this doesn't have anything to do with inheriting memories from their parents.

And yet siblings from the same parents often turn out extremely different.

Yes, that can happen, but obviously this Bishop 2 ended up in robotics , and so if he's a clone maybe another one didn't establish any interest in robotics and I can't imagine what happened to him.

Well, in terms of connecting the whole series with the AVP universe, we have only seen one man who is supposed to be taken as a human being, who looks like Charles Weyland

...and?  Not sure where you're going with this.

well, if there's one clone, I don't know how many clones they've made. Also I'm not giving up the possibility that he's an android who bleeds blood red fluid to make people think he's human, like some Blade Runner replicant

[SM]

To what end though?

I mean it's not like he opened a vein to show Ripley he bled red blood.

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

To what end though?

I mean it's not like he opened a vein to show Ripley he bled red blood.

well, I'm asking myself now to what end to people need to be shown to be bleeding. Maybe he would be prepared to go that far to persuade her to give up the alien queen if their interaction went that way.

If we take Ridley Scott's Blade Runner movie, there was a background scenario thought about that the Eldon Tyrell that we see in the movie is nothing but a replicant and there are a number of these replicants all over the world in each of the various Tyrell headquarters around the world, while the real Eldon Tyrell was in a cryogenic crypt awaiting a time when he was likely to be cured of an illness that was killing him, but there had been a powercut and Tyrell died, the corporation were embarrassed about this but kept the replicants going so that the Tyrell corporation remained with a figurehead. After Roy Batty killed one of Tyrell's replicants, he found all the others in the building and killed them all until he got to the real Tyrell's crypt

So this is quite a complicated scenario that I have enjoyed thinking about since i read the revelation in an old issue of Starburst. So the world of Blade Runner for Ridley is very close to the world of Alien, even to the degree he recently mentioned in the DVD for Bladerunner that the Bladerunner city was somewhere that the crew of the Nostromo would visit when they arrived on Earth. So if we're allowing the cross seeding of ideas here, Blade Runner made me think about how people of power would have benefited by having replicants who could have their own memories implanted into them and they would be capable of doing the work of the original, or even standing in for them in a dangerous places and allow themselves to take a gun bullet in an assassination attempt, maybe in a similar manner that Queen Amidala in The Phantom Menace would have a lookalike in her place while she pretended to be one of her handmaidens. And so I read about Fincher's interest in having multiple Bishops running around in his take on the story that he sold himself on to the Studio bosses. Whether he was being serious or not, it charged my imagination

And this all formed my back story for what was going on with Bishop 2, once i found out that Blade Runner's cinematographer was working on Alien 3. Richard Edlund who worked on Alien 3 felt there was some comparison between the two films in terms of what they had to say. I thought that I read that a number of people involved in the film thought of it as being a sort of a sequel to Blade Runner and I hated Alien 3 at the time and wondered how the they could compare this movie to Blade Runner, (but I read some funny reviews about Alien 3 that made me appreciate it more and then it matured with age.) I don't know where I read this and maybe it was a misreading of what Richard Edlund has said about his own personal thoughts.

So maybe this is the extent it goes

Continuation:

On top of that, i thought Bishop 2 character seemed a bit creepy, detached and mechanical for whatever reason, especially when he was doing the hand motions for taking the the chestburster out Ripley. He seemed like an automaton to me at first, while Bishop appeared to be like as much a 14 year old child as Lance said. And that's going by the Theatrical cut

[SM]

That's all very well, but it's a tad fanciful in regards to the current argument.  Overcomplicating things.

Richard Edlund, Ridley Scott and Jorden Cronenweth had no control over Alien3 story elements after all.

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

That's all very well, but it's a tad fanciful in regards to the current argument.  Overcomplicating things.

Richard Edlund, Ridley Scott and Jorden Cronenweth had no control over Alien3 story elements after all.

I don't perceive this as complicated for me, it's an interesting pattern. But what Edlund, Scott and Cronenweth were having a effect over how I was experiencing the story elements . It's my relationship with the movie we're talking about if we're going to talk about to what extent would i be going with this

I think of existence in complicated ways maybe, but I'm not out to simplify anything really, the world of Alien has some enjoyably complicated things going on, especially with the history of the alien and the nature of the derelict and how it got aboard the Sulaco too. I'm even enjoying holding four different ideas about who Bishop 2 is without feeling the need to choose one of them

Then there's a fact that all we're getting with this Bishop 2 character as a real man, is an actor with prosthetic part on the  side of his head with fake blood and there are a bunch of people behind the scenes who want you to believe because this that he is a real man and I find it unnerving that they expect anyone to really buy into this. Maybe this is the perfect response as an audience member to go through all of these different scenarios trying to work out what to think because I'd rather not take what is supposed to be the obvious, because unobvious things can happen, and then we might be talking about the world of the novels of Philip K. Dick, that might be where this all leads, and where this goes might be too troublesome for someone who wants things to fit in to the limitations of James Cameron's Aliens movie

[Tyler]

im going to go ahead and say android. if you all remember correctly, bishop gets hit on the left side of his head towards the end of the movie. what you see after he gets hit is, the left part of his head/ear is basically just peeled forward, and bishop seems to go on like nothing happend.

[maledoro]

Well, in real life you're supposing that people would follow the law. It'd be illegal to let that clone grow to term, but we know that in real life and in the Alien franchise itself the legality of an issue can be skimmed around by motivated people.

As much as the Company is known for doing illegal things, those illegal things are known to some of the characters and we movie-goers. Parading around a clone of one of their founding fathers is sure to send up a red flag.

Your talking about 8 + generations from the Weyland in AvP. Genetic dilution through these generations would make it unlikely that the Bishop II would look so similar to Weyland in AvP. Certainly he could have certain dominant traits the Charles Bishop Weyland had. But there are many recessive traits that probably wouldn't make it down the line. For instance he has kind of greenish eyes which are a recessive trait. Bishop II probably wouldn't have those. He has thin lips also a recessive trait. 

The genes I have that came from the paternal side of my family are strong. Looking at paintings and photographs of my ancestors, we all have the same eyes and some other features.

Another thing is Weyland never mentions in AvP any children, any heirs at all. Nor is there any reference to significant other or wife. He certainly acts like no one would miss his death.

It had been suggested that if Bishop's designer was a descendent that he wouldn't be that direct; he'd be a grand+ nephew rather than a grand+ son of Weyland. Also, there is no reference to a sperm bank or cloning facility, either.

Sure it would. I find that much more plausible than the 8 generation removed lookalike. Um while that would be possible I think it would be pretty damn creepy!

Nevermind that heredity is alive and well in reality.

Yes, that can happen, but obviously this Bishop 2 ended up in robotics , and so if he's a clone maybe another one didn't establish any interest in robotics and I can't imagine what happened to him.

As far as personality and other mental facets, a clone will not turn out like his predecessor. However, history has shown that some people are introduced into their parent's line of work by the parent and will encourage their progeny into doing the same. This is attributed to a familial bond between parent and child. With Weyland ("father") being gone, the clone ("child") would be less likely to take to Weyland's interests.

Then there's a fact that all we're getting with this Bishop 2 character as a real man, is an actor with prosthetic part on the  side of his head with fake blood and there are a bunch of people behind the scenes who want you to believe because this that he is a real man and I find it unnerving that they expect anyone to really buy into this.

Reality (that place inhabited by humans and not robots) can be cruel.

Maybe this is the perfect response as an audience member to go through all of these different scenarios trying to work out what to think because I'd rather not take what is supposed to be the obvious, because unobvious things can happen, and then we might be talking about the world of the novels of Philip K. Dick, that might be where this all leads, and where this goes might be too troublesome for someone who wants things to fit in to the limitations of James Cameron's Aliens movie

I guess a less-complicated way of saying that is that you're happy throwing realism out the window if it gets in the way of your misinterpretation of the film.

im going to go ahead and say android. if you all remember correctly, bishop gets hit on the left side of his head towards the end of the movie. what you see after he gets hit is, the left part of his head/ear is basically just peeled forward, and bishop seems to go on like nothing happend.

I'm going to go ahead and say that you are not that observant or that you lie. His head injury wasn't as severe as you say it was; nor did you notice (or point out) that he did cry out in pain and had continued to display his pain.

[Flaming Firefox]

I really don't see that he could be an android given the red blood. I think the whole point of showing that he bleeds red blood was to prove that he wasn't another android. His personality was also different than Bishop's as well. Unless he is an android with red fluid.

This leaves us with the conclusion that he is human.
Now he is either one of two possibilities given his name and connection to the Weyland in AvP.

A descendent of Weyland in AvP. Although like I pointed out no mention is ever made of Weyland having any family, kids, wife, girlfriend etc. His very statements seem to indicate that he had no family. In addition certain recessive traits that Weyland possess that I pointed out would almost certainly wouldn't be a part of Bishop II's physical features. But to confound things is the novelization calling him Michael Bishop, so is he related to Weyland or not?

or

A Clone. Although it is also not mentioned that he had his DNA stored anywhere prior to his body being disintegrated. Finding such DNA samples at his residence or even from prior medical blood samples would not be pretty easy. Especially if you had the money like Weyland corporation.

Add to this Henriksen has contradicted himself saying that he was a human and later saying he was an android.

[maledoro]

A descendent of Weyland in AvP. Although like I pointed out no mention is ever made of Weyland having any family, kids, wife, girlfriend etc.

Only because they weren't relevant to the story. There was no mention of Ripley's daughter in Alien.

In addition certain recessive traits that Weyland possess that I pointed out would almost certainly wouldn't be a part of Bishop II's physical features.

Unless the dominant traits were mistaken for recessive traits. Without seeing other members of his family, it's almost impossible to see which traits are dominant or recessive.

But to confound things is the novelization calling him Michael Bishop, so is he related to Weyland or not?

The novelization doesn't mention his name.

A Clone. Although it is also not mentioned that he had his DNA stored anywhere prior to his body being disintegrated. Finding such DNA samples at his residence or even from prior medical blood samples would not be pretty easy. Especially if you had the money like Weyland corporation.

As a rule, the default setting for most characters is "human". In the Alien universe, damaged droids bleed white, talk with electronically skewed voices, etc. The only thing that would contradict that is if Company Man (or someone else) would exclaim, "Shit! Our robot was hit! Even with the red additive, anybody can see that it's a robot!"

Add to this Henriksen has contradicted himself saying that he was a human and later saying he was an android.

Which, given the circumstances, one can tell he was waffling for the studio. It's easier (and kewler) to say that Bishop's designer was a droid than to explain basic biological principles to fans.

[Flaming Firefox]

Unless the dominant traits were mistaken for recessive traits. Without seeing other members of his family, it's almost impossible to see which traits are dominant or recessive.

Certain traits in all humans doesn't matter who you are, are recessive and others are dominant. You don't have to know anything about the person except which traits they have. Brown eyes for instance are always a dominant trait where blue eyes are recessive. The number of blue eyed people in the world is always declining due to this fact. In addition all blue eyed people have the same ancestor. Look it up.

On Bishop in not having a name in the novelization I quote this-

Foster's Alien³ novelisation gives Bishop II the name Michael Bishop and clearly indicates his status as a human.

As a rule, the default setting for most characters is "human". In the Alien universe, damaged droids bleed white, talk with electronically skewed voices, etc. The only thing that would contradict that is if Company Man (or someone else) would exclaim, "Shit! Our robot was hit! Even with the red additive, anybody can see that it's a robot!"

When did the androids in the Alien universe ever talk in skewed voices? They sounded completely human. The only momment I can think of is when Ash is really damaged, but he took a crud load of damage. Your statement on what they would say about him being a robot is totally off base. IN Aliens they didn't even mention Bishop was an android untill Ripley freaked out about it. The only reason she figured it out was the white blood. Otherwise from all outer appearances you can't tell they are androids. The fact that Ash was an android and his true idenitity was concealed from the crew of the Nostromo, shows the precedent was set in the movies that for some reason android's identies as androids are sometimes concealed.

[maledoro]

Certain traits in all humans doesn't matter who you are, are recessive and others are dominant. You don't have to know anything about the person except which traits they have. Brown eyes for instance are always a dominant trait where blue eyes are recessive. The number of blue eyed people in the world is always declining due to this fact. In addition all blue eyed people have the same ancestor. Look it up.

I'm aware of all that, but within an isolated population of people, blue eyes could dominate. Look that up.

On Bishop in not having a name in the novelization I quote this-

Foster's Alien³ novelisation gives Bishop II the name Michael Bishop and clearly indicates his status as a human.

I've read the novelization to Alien³ several times, and his character is unnamed. But, it does say that he is human.

In the Alien universe, damaged droids bleed white, talk with electronically skewed voices, etc.

When did the androids in the Alien universe ever talk in skewed voices? They sounded completely human. The only momment I can think of is when Ash is really damaged, but he took a crud load of damage.

You must have missed the magic word the first time: "damaged". I wasn't talking about the droids in general; just when they were damaged.

Your statement on what they would say about him being a robot is totally off base.

Your statement on what I had said about the robots is totally off base; I said "damaged".

IN Aliens they didn't even mention Bishop was an android untill Ripley freaked out about it. The only reason she figured it out was the white blood. Otherwise from all outer appearances you can't tell they are androids.

That's why I had made a point to use the word "damaged" in my statement.

The fact that Ash was an android and his true idenitity was concealed from the crew of the Nostromo, shows the precedent was set in the movies that for some reason android's identies as androids are sometimes concealed.

Until they are damaged.

[SM]

I've read the novelization to Alien³ several times, and his character is unnamed. But, it does say that he is human.

The 'Michael Bishop' is from the Alien3 trading cards.  Which from memory also say he's human.