Alien Covenant Fan Reviews

[NickisSmart]

Have some self respect man.

What makes you think I don't?

And you really should watch the film first before you start ripping into other people's reviews, no matter how you attempt to justify it.

If someone makes a shit argument, I'll attack the argument for it's faulty execution all I wish. Maybe it's a pretty big risk for a science officer, not out of the manual, but all the same one that I'm willing to take, because again, I'm attacking the execution of their argument, not the veracity of their eyewitness testimony.

[Snake]

Yeah. Very very hollow. The main character is an android with almost no feelings... I think we could describe Covenant just as David: sleek but manufactured, with a wrong and deficient logic.

That would be the royal we presumably?

He's a robot, of course he doesn't has human emotions! Dudes please...

[Predaker]

Have some self respect man.

What makes you think I don't?

That was in reply to this, which was your reply to someone sarcastically remarking how fun you must be at parties:

I don't go to parties. I do give good head, though, for what that's worth.

How much is that worth, though? $20?

And you really should watch the film first before you start ripping into other people's reviews, no matter how you attempt to justify it.

If someone makes a shit argument, I'll attack the argument for it's faulty execution all I wish. Maybe it's a pretty big risk for a science officer, not out of the manual, but all the same one that I'm willing to take, because again, I'm attacking the execution of their argument, not the veracity of their eyewitness testimony.

You can do that all you want but it won't change the fact that you're still coming from a place of ignorance.

[YutaniDitch]

Yeah. Very very hollow. The main character is an android with almost no feelings... I think we could describe Covenant just as David: sleek but manufactured, with a wrong and deficient logic.

That would be the royal we presumably?

He's a robot, of course he doesn't has human emotions! Dudes please...

Crying, trying to rape Daniels, lying, sarcastic, egomaniacal, psychotic, God complex, genocidal... You could have fooled me... Could he be MORE human...!? 😂💩

[Engineer]

Yeah. Very very hollow. The main character is an android with almost no feelings... I think we could describe Covenant just as David: sleek but manufactured, with a wrong and deficient logic.

That would be the royal we presumably?

He's a robot, of course he doesn't has human emotions! Dudes please...

Crying, trying to rape Daniels, lying, sarcastic, egomaniacal, psychotic, God complex, genocidal... You could have fooled me... Could he be MORE human...!? 😂💩

Don't forget... he also loved Dr. Shaw

[426Buddy]

I feel bad for the folks who hated Covenant enough to come here and post that hate and negativity over and over and over again. Its like they have some personal vendetta against the film. Seen it with so many alien films now it starts to feel comical.

Still not even close to the utter loathing and contempt that alien3 recieved upon release though. The reaction to AC is about the same as when Prometheus came out maybe. Hard to tell really, a lot of alien fans hated aliens when it came out too. (Lots of fans still hate aliens and the queen.)

[NickisSmart]

You can do that all you want but it won't change the fact that you're still coming from a place of ignorance.

Am I? I know the plot, which the reviews are constructed around. And often-times, these individuals use arguments aimed at explaining the film to people who haven't seen the film. They're designed to be seen and understood by individuals who are, as you put it ignorant. If this is true, I, as an ignorant person, should be able to critique their so-called review based simply on its contents. Whether or not I've seen Covenant is irrelevant, as a result, as is my so-called ignorance.

Furthermore, if I can dismantle an argument from a place of ignorance, what does that say about the argument, itself?

For example, people say they like Aliens; the same individuals say they hate Covenant, because it has stupid behavior in it. Their statement makes no sense, in that form, because Aliens also has stupid behavior in it, in spades. They would need to expand their thesis to something along the lines of, "Aliens' stupid behavior doesn't get in the way of it being entertaining because [insert argument, here]" but if they don't, their argument is weak. Without having seen Covenant, I can point this out. Seeing that film isn't necessary for another reason--that is, because the argument of "stupid behavior" will revolve around plot points, which I am familiar with, again, without having seen the film, because the reviewer has told them to me in order for me to be able to understand his so-called argument. The reviewer is required to explain the film in some shape or form to even make his points, to begin with, which I can attack based solely on what he provides.

So, in regards to attacking an argument that the critic makes, I am not ignorant at all. Rather, I am armed by this person with the very tools needed to defeat him. Anything else that I could be ignorant of, in regards to the film, simply doesn't matter, as I only need to know enough to point out the flaws in his argument, which he will have provided for me ironically in order to understand him. So, your statement, while it may be true, is still irrelevant and utterly pointless in regards to what I am doing with critics.

Also, $20? Bitch, please. Triple digits, easy.

[Engineer]

You can do that all you want but it won't change the fact that you're still coming from a place of ignorance.

Am I? I know the plot, which the reviews are constructed around. And often-times, these individuals use arguments aimed at explaining the film to people who haven't seen the film. They're designed to be seen and understood by individuals who are, as you put it ignorant. If this is true, I, as an ignorant person, should be able to critique their so-called review based simply on its contents. Whether or not I've seen Covenant is irrelevant, as a result, as is my so-called ignorance.

Furthermore, if I can dismantle an argument from a place of ignorance, what does that say about the argument, itself?

For example, people say they like Aliens; the same individuals say they hate Covenant, because it has stupid behavior in it. Their statement makes no sense, in that form, because Aliens also has stupid behavior in it, in spades. They would need to expand their thesis to something along the lines of, "Aliens' stupid behavior doesn't get in the way of it being entertaining because [insert argument, here]" but if they don't, their argument is weak. Without having seen Covenant, I can point this out. Seeing that film isn't necessary for another reason--that is, because the argument of "stupid behavior" will revolve around plot points, which I am familiar with, again, without having seen the film, because the reviewer has told them to me in order for me to be able to understand his so-called argument. The reviewer is required to explain the film in some shape or form to even make his points, to begin with, which I can attack based solely on what he provides.

So, in regards to attacking an argument that the critic makes, I am not ignorant at all. Rather, I am armed by this person with the very tools needed to defeat him. Anything else that I could be ignorant of, in regards to the film, simply doesn't matter, as I only need to know enough to point out the flaws in his argument, which he will have provided for me ironically in order to understand him. So, your statement, while it may be true, is still irrelevant and utterly pointless in regards to what I am doing with critics.

Also, $20? Bitch, please. Triple digits, easy.

But to call someone out as ignorant when you have no idea what their background is, academic or otherwise, is in itself ignorant. It's ignorance of the person you are insulting. Argue and debate all you want. But refrain from name calling for your own sake. Forum rules exist for a reason, and not many people will take anything you have to say seriously if you start off calling them "ignorant."

[NickisSmart]

But to call someone out as ignorant when you have no idea what their background is, academic or otherwise, is in itself ignorant. It's ignorance of the person you are insulting. Argue and debate all you want. But refrain from name calling for your own sake. Forum rules exist for a reason, and not many people will take anything you have to say seriously if you start off calling them "ignorant."

Forum rules exist for many reasons, largely so people can refer to them needlessly like here, in this case. It doesn't matter what his background is. If he wants to be treated as something other than an ignorant individual, by me, he can demonstrate it in his rhetoric. Otherwise, we're all strangers, here, defined purely by what we say. And as far as I'm concerned what he said was that of an ignorant person. Call me blunt, if you wish, but it's not the same thing as me calling him names the way you are insinuating; I can demonstrate ignorance. Hypothetically, him being a f**k-face, if I were to call him that (and I'm not)? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

[Engineer]

But to call someone out as ignorant when you have no idea what their background is, academic or otherwise, is in itself ignorant. It's ignorance of the person you are insulting. Argue and debate all you want. But refrain from name calling for your own sake. Forum rules exist for a reason, and not many people will take anything you have to say seriously if you start off calling them "ignorant."

Forum rules exist for many reasons, largely so people can refer to them needlessly like here, in this case. It doesn't matter what his background is. If he wants to be treated as something other than an ignorant individual, by me, he can demonstrate it in his rhetoric. Otherwise, we're all strangers, here, defined purely by what we say. And as far as I'm concerned what he said was that of an ignorant person. Call me blunt, if you wish, but it's not the same thing as me calling him names the way you are insinuating; I can demonstrate ignorance. Hypothetically, him being a f**k-face, if I were to call him that (and I'm not)? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

Since when is being called ignorant a compliment?

[Snake]

Yeah. Very very hollow. The main character is an android with almost no feelings... I think we could describe Covenant just as David: sleek but manufactured, with a wrong and deficient logic.

That would be the royal we presumably?

He's a robot, of course he doesn't has human emotions! Dudes please...

Crying, trying to rape Daniels, lying, sarcastic, egomaniacal, psychotic, God complex, genocidal... You could have fooled me... Could he be MORE human...!? 😂💩

David doesn't have a soul, therefore his feelings/emotions aren't real, he only emulates them. They make these guys...pretty close.

[Scorpio]

Not too close I hope.

[stroggificated]

I agree too... and why pretend not to read it? He's not saying anything new here; others have already said the same thing once or twice or more before and you read that. It's an opinion; everybody has one whether you agree with it or not.

I might have crossed the line with AVP and Alien Resurrection. 



I can only hope the next movie gets better. I really reached the point of indifference/apathy to this franchise since I watched Covenant.

[NickisSmart]

Since when is being called ignorant a compliment?

Why is that so important? I'm not interested in discourse consisting entirely of compliments. At the same time, calling someone ignorant, if it is merited, is not the same thing as doling out random insults.

[Engineer]

Since when is being called ignorant a compliment?

Why is that so important? I'm not interested in discourse consisting entirely of compliments. At the same time, calling someone ignorant, if it is merited, is not the same thing as doling out random insults.

merited?! Lmfao! Oh please. It's an insult no matter how you slice it. The only purpose of saying it is to degrade. Doesn't matter if there's any truth to it or not. you could have gotten your message across just fine without saying it at all. It's all about the rhetoric right?

And by the way, forum rules exist so the conversations, no matter how heated they may get, stay respectful and mature. Like I said before, no one is going to take what you say seriously if you immediately attack and start doling out insults. So there's really no point to it.

PS. All I'm saying here is take it down a notch. We're all fans, and we can have a mature conversation about the movie without getting all worked up.

I agree too... and why pretend not to read it? He's not saying anything new here; others have already said the same thing once or twice or more before and you read that. It's an opinion; everybody has one whether you agree with it or not.

I might have crossed the line with AVP and Alien Resurrection. 



I can only hope the next movie gets better. I really reached the point of indifference/apathy to this franchise since I watched Covenant.

Lol. If that's how you feel. But I thought you hit the nail on the head; I found it hard to care about any of the characters. They were acted better, but the pacing didn't allow me to get to know the characters so when they died I just shrugged it off.