Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

[wolf66]

Before Aaron hits Bishop he says "f**kin' android"

what do you think inspired him to believe that Bishop 2 was an android?

like i said we all have different opinions/ideas/theories. Every single person will never agree the same on

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

Okay, I'm  combining four posts together because they were done in a row, and I'm being told that this is not allowed, but it doesn't really help me if I am trying to respond to different posts and seperate what I'm typing as responses from the other ones, I think if someone wants to respond to something I said in one of the posts and not the rest, it all makes it a bit messy, but I suppose it probably doesn't pay to try to be orderly around here. Okay here we go!

But after there is blood on bishops hand!

there was blood coming out of Bishop 2's ear too, but what makes everyone feel the urge to take in the notion that on the basis of just because the blood is one colour or another that it proves or disproves that Bishop is an android or not. It seems that everyone expects the android blood to be coloured white throughout time in the universe of Alien.

At the end of the day in behind the scenes reality, the ear was prosthetic and the blood was fake but we are supposed to believe that the blood looks real in the film story, and people such as myself would question how real the injured head part is supposed to be and it takes me some years to get to the point of wondering what the weapon actually was used to get to the point where we have this half severed ear that's possibly supposed to be real for the character

Before Aaron hits Bishop he says "f**kin' android"

what do you think inspired him to believe that Bishop 2 was an android?

like i said we all have different opinions/ideas/theories. Every single person will never agree the same on

but still, it's your opinion, and I don't want to attack it because the film is going to be experienced in multitudes of different ways, but how did you get to that point where you decided that this was valid for you?

Before Aaron hits Bishop he says "f**kin' android"

what do you think inspired him to believe that Bishop 2 was an android?

Because ripley says that hes a bishop model sent by the company.

thanks, I'll take another look at that. Now I'm wondering what made Aaron finally get to the point where he agreed

  If he is human then Paul Anderson didn't really take Lance Henriksen's appearence in Alien 3 into much consideration when putting him and his character into AVP.

it certainly looks that way for me too, or maybe he read about James Cameron's interest in making a further Alien movie, maybe it was at the time of number four was on the horizon, and he was actually said to have wanted to make Bishop 2 into an android as well, I suppose this would have been his attempt to get the Alien saga back on track for Cameron's point of view

[Eidotemit]

Did you really just make 4 posts in a row? You could have done that in one post. 

[wmmvrrvrrmm]

Did you really just make 4 posts in a row? You could have don't that in one post. 

No! I didn't

actually I prefer to seperate responses to different people's posts

[maledoro]

well, one thing for sure, to identify what the character was hit with or even understand the fact it wasn't just a weapon as blunt as a pipe would changes my perspective on the injury, and maybe other people's too

Maybe some people...

[Eidotemit]

Did you really just make 4 posts in a row? You could have don't that in one post. 

No! I didn't

actually I prefer to seperate responses to different people's posts

The rules don't though

[Killer185]

Either its a clone, android, or weylend himself!
Maybe they recovered him and put his body in an experimental camber for preserving people?

[The Chibi Kiriyama]

Either its a clone, android, or weylend himself!
Maybe they recovered him and put his body in an experimental camber for preserving people?

I believe the self-destruct device's explosion did away with magic sci-fi revivals.

[maledoro]

Either its a clone, android, or weylend himself!
Maybe they recovered him and put his body in an experimental camber for preserving people?

Those claims have already been addressed.

[severen76]

Either its a clone, android, or weylend himself!
Maybe they recovered him and put his body in an experimental camber for preserving people?

Those claims have already been addressed.

And its a bad idea.
Cant we just say that anderson isnt as big a fan of alien franchise as he says, and didnt realise he was contradicting parts of it.

[BlkSoul]

Could be as you say

[Cellien]

Regardless of what the filmmakers said, if us movie goers have any question as to whether he's human or not, then it wasn't explained enough.  You shouldn't have to watch an interview with directors to know what they intended him to be.  That's like an artist trying to explain to his art director why his human figure drawing looks more like an elephant.  When the intended viewer can't tell what they're looking at, then something is wrong.

Yes, it could have been vague on purpose.. but for the sake of the movie-goer, I'd classify it as an unknown or just that's it's left open for the viewers to decide.  When viewing the movie, I really can't tell one way or the other..

[Eidotemit]

Either its a clone, android, or weylend himself!
Maybe they recovered him and put his body in an experimental camber for preserving people?

Or maybe its none of those things! Maybe its actually a different person! Maybe a descendant of some kind!

Again, by this logic Jerry and Hudson are either A) the same person, B) Hudson is an android, or C) a clone.

Also Weyland's body was vaporized in the explosion.

If you were being sarcastic ... my bad.

[maledoro]

Regardless of what the filmmakers said, if us movie goers have any question as to whether he's human or not, then it wasn't explained enough. You shouldn't have to watch an interview with directors to know what they intended him to be.

I didn't need to watch any interview to know he was human. It was never an issue to me, nor was it intended to be for anybody.

Yes, it could have been vague on purpose..

But, it wasn't.

but for the sake of the movie-goer, I'd classify it as an unknown or just that's it's left open for the viewers to decide.

There are some things that aren't left open for interpretation by the movie goers. Kubrick had stuck to his interpretations over that of the moviegoers, as had David Lynch; and these guys have directed films more surreal than Fincher had.

[Cellien]

Regardless of what the filmmakers said, if us movie goers have any question as to whether he's human or not, then it wasn't explained enough. You shouldn't have to watch an interview with directors to know what they intended him to be.

I didn't need to watch any interview to know he was human. It was never an issue to me, nor was it intended to be for anybody.

Good to know your take on it!