TED Talk page info Edit
The "About the speaker" part of the TED talk page indicates that Prometheus is ret-conning the continuity to eliminate the events of AvP. The page states that Peter build Weiland Industries based on his own technology and innovations (and not through off-world tech or a merger with Yutani Corporation). It would seem to imply that Peter Weyland was the founder of the corperation, not Charles Bishop Weyland.
This will probably require notations of a divergence of timelines, as the new film is not working off of the AvP lore and holding to a purely "Alien" continuity. The shift makes sense, as Ridley Scott was not a fan of the AvP franchise. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 20:38, March 3, 2012 (UTC)
- Then change the article. https://www.weylandindustries.com/timeline confirms that the AVP series is retconned. 18.104.22.168 06:33, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
- "Here’s the thing. Ridley invented this. He created this Alien universe. He birthed it out of his own heart and soul. So he gets to do whatever it is he wants to do and he wanted to use Weyland as a conduit in the story, and was not interested at all when I said to him, “You know, Weyland was a character in one of the Alien Vs. Predator movies,” he just sort of looked at me like I had just slapped him in the face. That was the beginning, middle and end of all Alien Vs. Predator references in our story process."
- ―Damon Lindelof
So there you go. It doesn't matter what the writer might think, on a film, the buck stops with the director, and Ridley Scott clearly ignored AVP when making Prometheus, and didn't care to follow on from AVP's events. And at the end of the day, Weyland Industries and Weyland Corp clearly cannot co-exist because they both have different origin stories.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 07:48, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, Ridley Scott HATED the AvP franchise. I almost think he did Prometheus just so he could ret-con those films out of the Aliens timeline. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 13:46, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
- The franchieses do not belong to Ridley Scott it belongs to BrandyWine and Fox. The refrence you used does not say anywhere that AvP was retconed further more when Ridley Scott actully got to watch the first AvP he thought it was a good movie, he very much liked the bits that tied into aliens coming to earth and teaching humans how to build.
- Further more you have not given any reasons why they cannot exist your just saying they cant does not make it so. Besides other stories in this fictional univerese show that they still exist like the Predator trilogy AvP3 and the articles from the creators of ACM while they where interviewed by PSM.белая армия 20:34, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
- The quote from Lindelof on that page clearly points out that Ridley Scott was aware that he was "overwriting" events laid out in the AVP films, and that he was making no attempt to follow AVP's canon. As for the reasons the two companies cannot co-exist, they are obvious:
- They have different names. One is called Weyland INDUSTRIES, the other is called Weyland CORP.
- Their founders are different. Weyland industries is established by Charles Bishop Weyland. Weyland Corp is founded by Peter Weyland. These are clearly two different people.
- Their origins are different. Weyland Industries is operating in 2004. Weyland Corp is not founded until 2012, 8 years later (as per the official Weyland Corp timeline).
- I have already laid out these reasons further up this page. For someone so adamant I provide proof of my argument, you seem happy to ignore this evidence whilst failing to provide any evidence to back up your own point of view, beyond your personal insistence both companies exist in the same timeline.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 20:47, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
- The quote from Lindelof on that page clearly points out that Ridley Scott was aware that he was "overwriting" events laid out in the AVP films, and that he was making no attempt to follow AVP's canon. As for the reasons the two companies cannot co-exist, they are obvious:
- Well I can't play a dvd for you to see the behind the scene stuff just go by the blue ray Predator three pack and the AvP blue ray two pack. The articles I am talking about you can find copied and posted to the Alien vs Predator Galaxy .net
- The names don't matter we know from looking the special features of the movies I listed and Aliens Quadrilogy their are many WY companines. Theirs a WY Corp China, a WY Corp Sanfransico, WY corp England, their are two others named in the Prometheus dvd that are not named on the time line.
- Diffrent groups of a company are going to have diffrent founders all we know from the time line is that Peter is the founder of Weyland Corp America, thats all we know for sure. We know both the Weyland Indurstires and Weyland Corp America exist because they are mentioned on the time line. You should be more careful when using just one source because it can, like the time line, be missing critical infromation.белая армия 20:57, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
- Special features on AVP1 and AVP2 are NOT sufficient evidence to back up your argument purely because they were made BEFORE Prometheus. The very nature of a retcon means it will alter things that have previously been stated as true. If this other evidence that Prometheus doesn't retcon AVP is apparently so widespread online, why can't you post some on here?
- As for saying the timeline is missing critical information, that is just wrong. It is the OFFICIAL timeline. That is a fact. If something is left out, it is inherently not part of that official timeline. If a film has a scene left out, it is never considered part of the story. It is a deleted scene. Only what is in the timeline can be considered official. Even if something has been left out, it is not up to you to retroactively include it, it is down to the people behind the official timeline. Maybe you should write to them and ask them to add Charles Bishop Weyland to the website. As for your multiple companies argument, with Weyland Corp being an American division of Weyland Industries, again the official timeline clearly states Weyland Corp is a BRITISH company, registered in the UK, and no part of a larger organisation.
- Until this issue is sorted, please leave the pages the way they were. If you are able to provide some information to back up your claims, I will happily change the pages, or let you do it, or whatever. But so far, just taking what is seen in the films themselves into account and the official online Weyland Corp corporate timeline, Weyland Corp and Weyland Industries do not co-exist.
- Leigh has provided a source, if you think the information is wrong then you need to discredit that source by bringing evidence of your own to the table. Also do not remove sources from pages, that is paramount to vandalism as you would be removing what is basically needed to make the pages of this wiki reliable. If a revert is made again in a style of edit warring, then I will have to lock the page and give out a warning. As Leigh said, if you find a source saying otherwise to the source he posted, then you are absolutely more than welcome to make changes to the page. To add my two cents, the avp film was or is canon but like it or not, retcons can and do happen, they have happened to the alien franchise before i.e Newt became Billie. So far it seems that Ridley ignored at least part the avp lore, namely charles and his company but it can go either way if there is different info out there. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 16:25, May 24, 2013 (UTC)
- @Leigh Burne: The information on the AvP blu-ray discs are important to this discusion because they have had huge ammounts of information added to them including info that might refreence Prometheus, like that Face Huggers my infact carry fluid that converts the internal structure of its host, this would also work with the info added about impregnation that it causes a cancer that consumes the host ACM.
- Its false to think the timeline is prefect because the people added even more information about Weyland corp and Weyland Industries in the special features. You know you kind of contradicted yourself in that you told me I can not refrence any special features because it did happen in the movie, well you quote is let better than the special features or the interveiws themselves on the discs, can you even be sure that was a legit interveiew? I know mine are legit because I was watching the guy talk on my screen. I am ok with the refrence though because they say in the quote that they used a AvP refrence.
- Also the same timeline you keep mentioning also refrences Weyland Industries meaning it still exists. If you look at the dates it clearly shows only the Date of Weyland Corp America, it says nothing about when Weyland Corp Britian was created or any other Branch. I have two other refrences from the Head writer of Prometheus stating it was still canon or still part of the alien mythology which you can't ignore.
- Also like I pointed out before your refrence actuly suports that AvP is still canon because they said they used a refrence from a AvP movie, however they are wrong because they also refrehnces AvP:R in that the Yutani Corp Japan had not merged with Weyland Industries to create Weyland Yutani Industries and Weyland Yutani Corp.
- белая армия
- No, I said you cannot reference special features from AVP and AVP:R specifically, because that film was made BEFORE Prometheus. Therefore, the features were made without knowledge of Prometheus, and therefore could not possibly acknowledge any retcon of information that Prometheus may make.
- "The information on the AvP blu-ray discs are important to this discusion because they have had huge ammounts of information added to them including info that might refreence Prometheus, like that Face Huggers my infact carry fluid that converts the internal structure of its host, this would also work with the info added about impregnation that it causes a cancer that consumes the host ACM."
- How does that link to Prometheus in any way? Unless they specifically say the Facehuggers carry the Black Liquid (which they won't, because that interview was made before Prometheus had even been conceived), that statement is far too vague to back up a connection between the two films. Many creatures produce various liquids — the Xenomorphs themselves are covered in slime — but that in no way proves they are related to the Black Liquid mutagen from Prometheus. Not to mention you yourself say that the Facehuggers "may" carry some kind of fluid. That's not even a statement of fact, it's a theory.
- "I have two other refrences from the Head writer of Prometheus stating it was still canon or still part of the alien mythology which you can't ignore."
- What "head writer"? There were several writers on Prometheus. More to the point, while you're very correct in saying I cannot ignore this statement, it is clear that Ridley Scott did. The director of the film has final say, and Scott clearly did not wish to follow the continuity of the AVP films. The writer cannot overrule the director, and so Scott's opinion wins out.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 08:13, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
- You do realize it is Fox and Brandywine that has say in what is and isn't canon right? They were in charge of the information that was added to the special blu-ray two pack which came out much closer to the time Promethues was first shown. Its not like the information of the movie was whitheld from Fox or Brandywine about what was going to happen in it.
- Your kinda throwing stuff into your argument that makes no since, you know very well that the refrence in the Weyland Yutain Industries database about the Facehugger connects it with the blackfluid because they are both mutagentics, or at least the fluid the Facehugger carries. We are not talking about the OTHER fluids on the Xenomorphs are not relivent, your just being difficult now. The reason it sounds like a theory is because the creatures themsleves are two difficult to study not that it helps that they change on whim so their is no standard Xenomorph.
- The writers name is Jon Spaihts
- Most importantly, no where in your re fence does it say Ridley Scott made AvP noncanon, they even say they used a reference from it. Hell Ridley Scott even said he liked the first AvP after he watched it which was after he made the first Prometheus.===
You did tell me I can't use information from any special feature, all the Alien Quadrilogy shows Weyland Yutani corp San Francisco, Hong Kong, England, Tokyo. On the Prometheus disc is shows a heck of a lot of Weyland organizations that are not labeled a Corp. On the time line we see the creation of Weyland Corp America 'October 11, 2012', we also see Weyland Industries on the same time line which means it still exists. We also see that events did happen from the AvP movies because they are referenced in AvP 3 and to a degree ACM.
"Weyland Industries launches first industrialized space mission to install solar panels that align and move in Earth’s orbital plane but at an axial tilt, imitating a perpetual summer solstice. The renewable energy gathered in the months following this expedition made Peter Weyland his first billion. March 27, 2015" белая армия 19:38, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
- It's worth pointing out that Ridley Scott is not the be-all end-all authority regarding what is or isn't "canon" within a franchise he doesn't own. He can choose not to like AvP as much as he wants, but that doesn't actually mean it's not canon, even if that was his personal intention.
- If we're citing the Weyland Industries website as "canon", it's worth noting that it doesn't actually outright confirm OR deny AvP existing, which is a really clever way to go about it. For the people who want to continue accepting AvP as canon, they can do so since there's nothing contradicting it, and those who want to disregard it can do so as well since there's nothing outright confirming AvP, either.
- And if we're not citing the website as "canon", then 'Prometheus' itself certainly doesn't discount AvP.
- Leigh, as for those "three reasons" for why the the two Weyland companies are different, those are hardly irreconcilable. It's your opinion that they "prove" anything, and it's certainly not indisputable fact. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 06:55, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
- You're both very correct, Fox and Brandywine do indeed dictate what is an isn't cannon in the franchise. And when they authorized Ridley Scott to make the film he made and change the origin story of Weyland-Yutani by using Peter Weyland, they dictated that Peter Weyland was the new cannon.
- "you know very well that the refrence in the Weyland Yutain Industries database about the Facehugger connects it with the blackfluid because they are both mutagentics, or at least the fluid the Facehugger carries."
- It does not connect it in any way. Saying it contains a mutagenic fluid in NO WAY proves it is related to the Black Liquid. There are many mutagenic liquids out there, both in reality and in sci-fi. Unless it specifically states Facehuggers contain the Black Liquid, it is no proof at all.
- "You did tell me I can't use information from any special feature, all the Alien Quadrilogy shows Weyland Yutani corp San Francisco, Hong Kong, England, Tokyo."
- You've misunderstood what that means. Those are the locations of W-Y's head offices. It's common for businesses to list the locations of their major offices beneath their company name. It doesn't at all mean there are distinct branches of the company. It simply means there are major W-Y headquarters in those cities.
- As for video games referencing the films, games are widely accepted to be a secondary cannon on this website. While they do indeed often reference the movies, they also often contradict the films and even each other. ACM claims Chestbursters are fatal even if they are successfully removed, while Alien Resurrection clearly contradicts this. The original AVP game shows how W-Y set up a research lab around the Derelict on LV-426, and yet ACM retcons all that and shows how they've set up a completely different research facility in the same location. The games are certainly not gospel.
- As for whether or not the companies are irreconcilable, the fact their foundations are different kinda backs that up. One film claims Charles Bishop Weyland started it up, the other Peter Weyland. Clearly two different people. Likewise, the different dates given for when the company was established also disprove they are the same. It wouldn't be hard for them to say Weyland Corp was founded at the beginning of the millennium, so that it could tie in with Charles Bishop Weyland's company. But they didn't, they said it was founded in 2012, which is almost a decade after it supposedly appears in AVP. Unless Weyland Corp has created time travel, that's just impossible.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 08:27, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
- Re: the video games and contradictions, the movies contradict each other as well (hence this discussion even taking place) and yet here we are. :P
- A:CM claims that embryos can't be removed... and perhaps that's true, given the technology and understanding of the Alien creature at the time A:CM takes place. Resurrection takes place 200 years later (with all the medical/technological advancements that could follow from that), not to mention they're removing an Alien from a host that is herself part-Alien, and could very well be exempt from the problems present in Colonial Marines.
- The first AvP PC game doesn't contradict Colonial Marines, since they take place 10 years apart. There's nothing to say that W-Y didn't set up a second, more permanent facility at some point, and opted to build it right around the Derelict this time.
- Re: the companies being irreconcilable, that's easy to fix. Check out the corporate timeline:
- "Weyland Corporation is recognized as a legal entity and corporation under United States law and receives their Certificate of Incorporation from the Companies House in the United Kingdom. Due to the combined value of Sir Peter Weyland’s various patents and patent-pendings, the company incorporates with a higher fair market valuation than any other company in history. October 11, 2012"
- That can easily be interpreted as it being a *separate* corporate legal entity from his father's company. You'll notice that the timeline doesn't actually state when the company was *founded*, merely when it was recognized as a legal entity. Those are distinct concepts, and it's in-line with what I said earlier about the timeline neither confirming nor contradicting 'AvP' (and why that was a good move). That would address the "different founder" and "different name" points you brought up.
- I'm not trying to discount the movie, I'm just pointing out that Prometheus has overwritten at least some of its mythos. If you're implying that I'm making this argument because I dislike AVP, then I should point out that I dislike AVP and Prometheus equally. It's just clear that Scott, while perhaps not intentionally setting out to retcon AVP, clearly was not bothered when he found out he was contradicting that movie.
- Regarding the difference between the company being founded and it being recognized as a legal entity — Weyland Industries is clearly operating on a pretty huge scale in AVP as they own at least one large array of satellite dishes of some kind. Be pretty hard to set that up if you aren't legally recognized as a company!--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 10:42, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
- My point was that Peter Weyland's company could be operating as a *separate* legal entity to his father's already-existing company. The companies may very well be separate to begin with, and then perhaps as Peter's company grows it absorbs his father's company. Not to mention, regarding the "different names" thing, WeylandIndustries.com refers to the company by *both* names throughout the site. Something to keep in mind is that the "corporate timeline" is hardly an unbiased source - it's very clearly a corporate document, written to paint Weyland Corp in the best possible light. Perhaps Peter didn't have a very good relationship with his father, and opted to whitewash out any reference of him? As I said, it's certainly not irreconcilable.
- It's also worth pointing out that one of the entries on the timeline happens in the same month and year (and nearly the same day) that 'AvP' takes place. I personally take that as a subtle wink to people familiar with 'AvP'. ;)
- "That can easily be interpreted as it being a *separate* corporate legal entity from his father's company. You'll notice that the timeline doesn't actually state when the company was *founded*, merely when it was recognized as a legal entity. Those are distinct concepts, and it's in-line with what I said earlier about the timeline neither confirming nor contradicting 'AvP' (and why that was a good move). That would address the "different founder" and "different name" points you brought up.
Not to mention, discounting 'AvP' on an AvP wiki strikes me as pretty wacky, but that's neither here nor there."
- No offence but if you're going to debate (and it would be good to have more involved so we can sort it out quicker XD) its best to leave out the wild speculation such as that Charles is Peter's father, plus other speculations. Fanfiction and speculation is best left out of these debates. AVP is not getting discounted on this wiki, it never has and never will and its arguably the most important part of this wiki. What Leigh is getting at and he has already said is that Prometheus retconned or ignored the events of the AVP films or at least the first one, retcons do happen in the avp universe, it has happened many times and probably will happen again, it does not mean that avp is being erased.
- You're right about the Alien: Resurrection thing though, it is 200 years later and so they probably figured out how to do the procedure properly but from what is shown (from what I remember of the film anyway), is that a chestburster with a small umbilical cord is removed from the imperfect clone, the scientist say nothing about the placenta, they say something like "doing well" and "sow her up" after Gediman asks if they can let her live, the placenta is supposed to be like cancer which becomes rooted to all the major organs in the chest, and leaving it in her would still be dangerous since her partial alien dna would not save her from something that is like a disease, xenomorphs have been shown to be affected by some conditions and Ripley 8 is still half human.
- I agree that leaving things unsaid on that website is a smart move by them, though also frustrating to some because as far as I know, they have never been clear on the matter. Our policy on here is also to leave the matter of canon unsaid, this allows people to make their own mind up on what is canon and whats not as its the sources that matter here and if things are sourced then everything from games, comics and novels are welcome and treated with equal respect to films. However, if a film or some other medium contradicts something then it must be noted and a canon issue would then come up. Its good that you try and find ways to reconcile everything since there are quite few issues, but on here sources matter, though everyone is absolutely welcome to their views. You should make a blog about how you reconcile everything in the franchise. It will be an interesting read.
- Anyway, there would need to be sources with opposing info to contest with what Leigh put down, then the page can be changed. Simply disagreeing is not enough, that goes for белая армия too, back up the argument with a source. Actions speak louder than words. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 00:23, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
I just want to say that I'm not a huge fan of wiki talk page formats for "discussions". It feels really cramped and limiting, and I find it difficult to respond to specific points someone made without my post ending up all clunky and awkward. Maybe I'm just not used to the format, but I've used messageboards for years and years and that's what I'm familiar with. :P
Re: Peter's father, it isn't exactly wild speculation when Peter is born at a time when Charles Weyland was still alive. It's more of... reading between the lines, especially if the Weyland Corp timeline is (intentionally) vague regarding AvP stuff. The timeline does say Peter's father was an engineer, and Charles Weyland is at least heavily implied to be an engineer, if not outright confirmed (the magazine cover in 'AvP', and the movie novelization might mention it but I don't have my copy handy to check).
Re: Prometheus and retcons, I suppose I'd have reservations outright deleting elements of the mythos - as a "completionist", I'm of the opinion that it's preferable to find ways to get sources to fit together, even if it takes some creative interpretation on the part of the reader to do so. There's a difference between a retcon that adds something (like the addition of the Queen in 'Aliens', which was essentially a retcon) and one that deletes something, like you're saying Prometheus is doing. I'd think it would be wiser to perhaps say that Prometheus introduces ideas that could be interpreted as being potentially contradictory, rather than outright saying "this has been retconned and is no longer true". I think that would be a pretty reasonable compromise, no? It's acknowledging the potential for contradiction, but also allowing the potential for it being addressed/reconciled in the future by an "official" source.
Re: the chestburster placenta and Alien Resurrection, you could argue that 'Alien3' contradicts Resurrection in that regard since Colonial Marines likely got the placenta idea from the Alien3 EEV scan of the Queen in Ripley, which shows a bunch of tendrils and connecting capillaries all over the place (although if I remember right, 'AvP: Eternal' says that those capillaries dissolve just prior to the chestburster popping out of the host. As for why they weren't present in Resurrection, I could come up with a bunch of possible explanations. Perhaps they were removing the Queen just prior to it being born, so they'd dissolved, or perhaps the cancerous placenta didn't form because Ripley was part-Alien herself, etc.
Re: canon, while FOX isn't exactly as vigilant as, say, Lucasfilm is when it comes to policing continuity, I *do* have a ton of quotes from FOX and others where they're quite consistent about what FOX considers "canon" (short version: damn near everything is canon). While I would prefer to reconcile contradictions, I'm also of the opinion that a lot of the minor contradictions can be handwaved by interpreting some sources as being biased/unreliable, and therefore not meant to be taken literally. Stuff like gameplay mechanics (different games have offered different drum mag sizes for the M56 Smartgun, for instance, or Alien movement speeds, etc), stuff like that. Or certain sources, like the Herk Mondo comics - I see them more as "tall tales", where perhaps the general ideas took place, but we're not supposed to believe that Herk *literally* lugged around a giant laser cannon and took on a hive of Aliens single-handedly while quipping one-liners and saving sexy space-babes. Likewise it makes the Kenner toy mini-comics a whole lot more palatable (and easy to reconcile) if you interpret them as propaganda meant for children, perhaps depicting androids based on otherwise "real" people (like the Ripley android in 'The Female War'). It also helps explain how the characters are able to take on entire hives by themselves, and are never in danger of being facehugged for some reason. :P
It's worth keeping in mind that canon and continuity aren't necessarily synonyms, and especially since this is all fiction and art, much of it is up for interpretation anyway. Just look at the origins of "canon" - Biblical Canon. There's tons of contradictions throughout the Bible, but people still believe in a "canon" of what Gospels are true or not (and more to the point, not everyone agrees on what is "canon", and that's perfectly fine). I'm not saying continuity isn't important, just that perhaps it doesn't need to be the be-all, end-all, especially if it can be fixed up with patented Continuity Spackle™ Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 02:23, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- I completely understand where you are coming from and your own personal views but as a wiki, we do need sources, it is the only thing that will make it reliable though the sources themselves have to be reliable too. Speculation and connecting dots is fine if you doing it personally (and not in the articles) and if you're only expressing your opinion and own theories. Fortunately Canon is not really the main issue here, the debate is about the two companies and if Weyland industries was replaced with Weyland corp. So far it seems to be a retcon, one that does not completely delete but replaces. Honestly though I am neutral here, I am just making sure this debate stays clean and adding some input here and there. I personally have no view of canon either way, I just look for sources and so on, the only time when I would view something as canon or non canon is if the higher ups say so or if a contradiction happens, I think one thing we can all agree on in terms of canon is that the films are higher up in the totem pole unless said so by those dudes in suits. I know that some people either view everything as canon or only a certain medium and that is fine as long as the articles are not messed with such bias or personal views. As for your quotes you mentioned, I am not sure if I have seen or heard them myself because I do have a lot of the dvds but it has been awhile since I watched the special features. I heard from some folks that those quotes are not entirely crystal in their meanings. Though I would rather see them myself than listen to them (too much bias). The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 02:49, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Re: opinions and "retcons", the problem is that even Leigh's interpretation of the Weyland timeline as being a wholesale "retcon" that wipes out the Company's history as presented in 'AvP' is exactly that: an interpretation, an opinion. It would be equally valid to say that there may simply be other information we don't possess that would clear the matter up, rather than immediately jumping to "welp, time to delete the 'AvP' version". That's why I proposed the compromise, having the Trivia section point out the potential discrepancy, but also clarify that we might be missing vital data that could explain it. "MOTHER is still collating", etc. :P
- Re: sources, I'd say 'AvP' itself is a pretty solid source, especially if we're going to say that movies trump peripheral sources (like tie-in websites). The existence of the Weyland website doesn't instantly negate the existence of 'AvP', and to presume so is kinda circular reasoning -- you'd be saying that 'AvP's version doesn't exist because the website negates it, and that the website's version is "true" because 'AvP' has been negated.
- Also as mentioned, Weyland Industries is referred to as Weyland Corp on its website, for what that's worth.
- It's also worth pointing out that Ridley Scott's intention to ignore 'AvP' doesn't mean that its depiction is automatically stricken from the record. A similar case would be with Robert Rodriguez outright saying he was going to be ignoring 'AvP' when he made 'Predators', but then when it came time to make the merchandising for the movie, instead of NECA designing the packaging in-house as they usually do, FOX specifically stepped in and designed the packaging for them.... and included a ton of ham-fisted AvP and EU references all over the place. :P
- Re: canon and quotes, there's a few from the supplemental features on the DVDs, but the rest is from various authors and licensees talking about their interactions with FOX, the approval process involved in licensing, and what FOX has told them is "canon". I could post the quotes here, or elsewhere if it would be more appropriate as to not derail this topic, etc. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 05:48, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
Started a new section, hope that's OK, but it was just taking too long to scroll down the one we were using!
I'll say it again, AVP is NOT a suitable source for disproving any potential retcon, because it came before that retcon. That would be like claiming Darth Vader murdered Luke Skywalker's father just because they said so in A New Hope, even though The Empire Strikes Back says otherwise. (And yes, that was indeed a retcon in the Star Wars series, they never intended for Vader to be Luke's dad when they made the first film.)
We can ignore the Weyland timeline if you wish. Even I will admit that site is a little vague. The only really decent source I have is that quote from Ridley Scott that proves he ignored AVP when he made Peter Weyland the founder of Weyland Corp. I've looked for other official sources, but I haven't been able to find any. (I haven't been able to find any sources supporting the other side of the argument either.)
Now I fully agree that that quote does not set in stone that AVP has been officially retconned. But it certainly strongly implies it by making it clear Scott was happy to contradict AVP's version of events, in a film he was authorized to make by Fox. (Let's not forget, Fox already made him remove the Xenomorphs entirely from the film, so it's safe to say they knew exactly what he was doing with it.) Considering no one has yet provided any real evidence to contradict this quote (again, information from AVP itself is not particularly credible in this regard due to the reason I mentioned in my first paragraph) I feel that quote is reason enough to state the companies are unrelated in this article.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 08:15, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is you're using circular reasoning to conclude that the Company depicted in 'AvP' doesn't exist, because of a (vague, easily reinterpreted) line on the tie-in website's timeline. I'm not saying we shouldn't reference the timeline, just that it's hardly a *fact* that 'AvP's depiction has been retconned out of existence. "Implies" isn't good enough, especially if the contradictions are a far cry from airtight (not to mention Prometheus itself doesn't contradict 'AvP', and I highly doubt Ridley Scott personally wrote the Weyland website's content).
- What's wrong with the compromise I've mentioned several times? It allows for the possibility of there being a contradiction, but also allows for the interpretation that there isn't one. For what it's worth I don't have a problem with saying that they're unrelated - even the timeline hints at that. What I take issue with is the idea that the Weyland company as shown in 'AvP' *never existed* or something like that, or that Charles Weyland never existed or something. "Retconned" could very well mean "Charles Bishop had a company, he had a brilliant estranged son who inherited all of his wealth upon his death, and his son went on to make his own highly successful company which ultimately absorbed his father's company". This would allow for everything as depicted in 'AvP', as well as the Weyland timeline.
- I don't recall FOX making Ridley Scott remove the Aliens from Prometheus - in fact the Prometheus art book seems to indicate that that was Ridley's call. As far as I've been aware, FOX was reasonably hands-off with Prometheus and just let Ridley Scott do his own thing because he's Ridley Scott. I'm totally open to being misinformed on that, and if you've got any quotes about FOX telling Ridley to remove the Aliens then I'd love to see them.
- I already showed that Ridley Scott's intention to disregard 'AvP' isn't good enough by itself to automatically discount 'AvP', since he doesn't own the franchise. I provided the counter-example of Robert Rodriguez also intending to disregard 'AvP', and yet here we are (not to mention, FOX ended up stepping in personally and outright going against his intention via the merchandise). Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 08:29, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not saying Weyland Industries doesn't exist, just that it doesn't exist as far as Prometheus is concerned, and that it is not related to Weyland Corp. That Scott quote quite clearly states he was aware that Peter Weyland contradicted Charles Bishop Welyand, and that John Spaihts informed him of this. The quote isn't from some "tie-in website's timeline", as you put it, it's a quotation from an interview with the film's writer on a recognised online publication, there's a big difference. With respect, you haven't provided anything like that to back up your own argument.
- As for bringing Predators into the argument, that's a very different kettle of fish. Predators simply ignored the AVP films altogether and failed to touch on anything they brought up. Prometheus provided information that specifically contradicted AVP, namely making Peter Weyland the founder of Weyland Corp. Saying he might be Charles Bishop Weyland's son or nephew or favourite cousin is just wild fan speculation. The film itself makes it clear Peter started/founded Weyland Industries, NOT Charles. It also makes it clear there is only one Weyland business (or at least only one of any note), so, again, saying there might be another Weyland Industries at the same time is similarly speculative.
- As for Xenomorphs in Prometheus, this page — http://screenrant.com/prometheus-story-alien-engineers/ states that Fox was responsible for their removal. To save you reading the whole article, specifically — "According to Spaihts, the decision to remove the Xenomorphs and their murderous progeny from Prometheus came largely from producers, who wanted to see the eventual movie stand on its own rather than as a part of the somewhat-moribund Alien franchise." I've heard it said elsewhere as well, but that source should suffice.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 09:02, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for that quote, I hadn't heard that before.
- Re: speculation, everything you've said (that Charles doesn't exist, that there's only one Weyland business) is equally speculative. The movie doesn't actually say anything of the sort. Charles could have founded *a* Weyland Industries, but that doesn't preclude the existence of the Weyland company as seen in 'AvP'. As I said earlier (and as The Cruentus recognized), the corporate timeline neither confirms nor denies the events of 'AvP', and the movie does the same.
- As stated, there's nothing to say that Charles didn't found a Weyland company, and then his son Peter develops his own following his father's passing, using his father's assets, and ultimately absorbs his father's company. What you're proposing is equally "wild fan speculation" (in that it follows from a very specific interpretation of information which can be interpreted plenty of different ways), which is why I've been proposing a compromise that no one has seen fit to respond to yet for some reason. As I've said a few times now, the compromise would acknowledge that there's more than one interpretation of the data, and that not everyone agrees that it's an irreconcilable conflict between 'AvP' and 'Prometheus'.
- Re: 'Predators', just because 'Prometheus' (allegedly) contradicts something doesn't change the fact that Robert Rodriguez had specific intentions regarding his movie and how it would treat 'AvP', and ultimately his opinion didn't mean anything since he doesn't own the franchise. Elevating Ridley Scott and his intentions (which are equally meaningless) doesn't make sense. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 10:34, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- You both have your own points, Xeno is right about the site being more or less neutral and Leigh is right that it is usually the up to date info that matters in retconning. Leigh has provided some sources, we would like to have some other sources that prove otherwise, and as for his source being open to interpretation, I think the same can be said about those quotes according to some folk, though I prefer to see for myself rather take their words. Post it on my talk page. :)
- Leigh, re-post that quote from Damon here so we can have a look at it. Xeno, a compromise would be good indeed and I am most certainly open to it but first we need to exhaust all possible avenues here in this debate. Words are almost meaningless here now, we need sources and any other good references that can confirm or deny Leigh's source.
- As you said Xeno, 20th century Fox is the higher authority on this matter but as Leigh pointed out, they charged Ridley Scott with the film and they knew what he was doing, they wanted the Xenomorphs out, (I'm guessing that is why some are not fussed about Prometheus, along with other reasons) and they approved the final film. You pointed that Fox is not as vigilant as the star wars higher ups so it could either be a screw up on part of fox for over-looking it or they may have approved of the change. This is what we need to sort out if possible.
- My input: So far it seems that Prometheus at the very least ignored avp, whether it retconned it or not we will try and find out. The two companies and the two Weylands are the conflict, I know that you like to say they are related Xeno, but it is just speculation based on connecting dots and theorizing to reconcile the differences. At the end of the debate and after everything has been exhausted, we can talk about a compromise which is assuming that no other source has been found. Right then, post that quote Leigh and we can start discussing that to see if there are different interpretations. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 12:49, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- What I am saying is not wild speculation at all. Prometheus, and especially the related TED talk video featuring Guy Pierce as a young Peter Weyland, make it reasonably clear Weyland Corp is not an offshoot of some other company, but is Peter Weyland's brainchild. It's one thing to interpret that given evidence as I have. To claim Peter Weyland is Charles Bishop Weyland's son is another thing entirely. NOWHERE has that ever been hinted at in any way — it is a theory completely fabricated by fans to try and explain away the differences. But the fact those differences exist in itself helps to support the argument they are not supposed to relate. Granted, that is hardly concrete proof. But it is far better than no proof, which is what the father-son argument has behind it.
- Anyway, here's that quote:
- Q: "You said nothing is an accidental reference, so is there a possible intentional Alien Vs. Predator reference in that the Weylands are always seeking eternal life?"
- A: "You mean in terms of Charles Bishop Weyland? Look, as to what’s canon and what’s not canon, for me as a screenwriter it’s transcended by Ridley as a director. Here’s the thing. Ridley invented this. He created this Alien universe. He birthed it out of his own heart and soul. So he gets to do whatever it is he wants to do and he wanted to use Weyland as a conduit in the story, and was not interested at all when I said to him, “You know, Weyland was a character in one of the Alien Vs. Predator movies,” he just sort of looked at me like I had just slapped him in the face. That was the beginning, middle and end of all Alien Vs. Predator references in our story process."
- Throwing in my two cents: The way that Lindelof immediately jumps all over distancing himself from the whole canon-non-canon argument, even though that really wasn't what the question was asking, makes it seem like he knows full well that the two stories conflict, although obviously he recognises it's not his place to set the record straight. The way he refers to the 'Weyland character' says to me that he was aware the Peter Weyland origin was not compatible with the Charles Bishop Weyland one. He doesn't say "Charles Bishop Weyland was in AVP", or "a Weyland guy was in AVP", he simply says the Weyland character was in the earlier film. THE Weyland character, as in the one who started the company. I will grant you that's my own interpretation of what he's said, but interpretation is very different from speculation. The quote also makes it clear that Ridley was contemptuous of AVP's mythos, and that he was not concerned with following it. When he was told that Peter Weyland was a character that had previously appeared, albeit in another form, in AVP, he clearly didn't care, and certainly didn't intend to change his character to better gel with the earlier movie.
- Again, I will grant you I've interpreted that in my own way, and maybe you interpret it differently, but the very least that quote certainly doesn't back up the 'they're related' argument. And unfortunately that's the only real evidence I've seen anyone bring to the table so far.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 14:01, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
Re: Peter being Charles' son, I'd say that the corporate timeline hints at it by mentioning that Peter's father was an engineer (Charles was an engineer), and them being alive at the same time and operating in largely the same corporate fields. It'd be a pretty mind-blowing coincidence that there's two guys named Weyland operating companies with the same slogan and similar logos. :P Granted that's interpretation, but that's just as much interpretation as "Charles and his company don't exist".
Re: the Lindelof quote, it's worth keeping in mind that even if Ridley Scott didn't intend to reference 'AvP' in any way, Lindelof still wrote the movie, and perhaps *he* threw in a reference (as the interviewer points out, "Weylands seeking eternal life" is a bit of a recurring theme). This would hardly be unprecedented - George Lucas has said that he doesn't follow the Star Wars EU terribly closely, but that didn't stop the animators for the prequels from throwing in tons of EU references in the background and whatnot. Likewise, despite Robert Rodriguez' insistence that 'Predators' would only follow the first movie, his film still managed to include ideas initially created in 'AvP' and elsewhere (the hologram-projector on the wrist gauntlet, for example). Also, Lindelof doesn't say "THE Weyland was a character in AvP", he just says "Weyland was a character". As in, "there is a character named Weyland in AvP". He's not making a singular distinction that there is only one unique Weyland, period. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 16:07, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Just to point something out, that the "Weylands seeking eternal life is a bit of a recurring theme" is not really true, Charles simply wanted to make history by discovering the pyramid, Michael wanted to study the Aliens and Karl or at least Groves wanted to have mankind as the dominant species. Peter however, clearly wanted an extension on his life and probably would go for immortality....instead he got a severe headache after being headbutted by David's severed head. XD The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 16:56, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- To clarify, I didn't mean "eternal life" literally with regard to Charles (since being immortalized via history is a form of "eternal life", and that was Charles' stated goal) and I suspect the interviewer talking with Lindelof meant the same thing. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 17:07, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- I've done some more browsing of the Weyland Corp website and found this: "Fifty years ago, our founder Sir Peter Weyland set out to change the world. Now, the company he created so many years ago works tirelessly with the same unlimited ambition to improve the world he changed." Peter founded AND created Weyland Corp?
- @Leigh Burne: The problem with that statement about Peter Weyland is that it doesn't say which Weyland Corp he created, are we going to assume he Incorperated every single Weyland Corp? Like the time line shows the only thing for sure he created was Weyland Corp America.
- We know from the time line Weyland Industries exists at the same time that Weyland Corps exist. What we do not know is who created the Weyland Industry going by the information on time line. Since Weyland Industries was in AvP it would have to be Charles Weylands Weyland Industries that Peter Weyland has control off and uses along side the other Weyland Corps and other Weyland Organizations.
- I got a message informing me that an Industry and a Corperation are two diffrent things all together in function and when the law is concerened. I am looking it over right now and so far that statement appears to be correct, so I don't think we can say that an Industry and a Corperation are interchangable terms. So we can't say that when Weyland Corp America was created that Weyland Industry just came into being.
белая армия 21:10, June 14, 2013 (UTC)::::
Just a reminder that the Weyland timeline (and entire website) is certainly not an unbiased source, and that's probably worth recognizing. It's very clearly written to paint Weyland and his company in the absolute best possible light, and could arguably be seen as "revisionist history". There's literally no mention anywhere of any sort of lawsuits, questionable activities, anything that would reflect poorly on the Company. You mean we're supposed to believe that the Company never did anything questionable or objectionable, ever? Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 22:27, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
- The company by future standards would be far from morally spotless but remember, the website is just about the weyland corp, not its future incarnate so I doubt kidnap, murder and other unethical things to get alien specimens happened yet. They are just a run of a mill (albeit advanced) company presently, however it is entirely possible for wrong doings to still happen since immoral and corrupt activities happen in real world companies too, hell some business probably do it regularly to thrive. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 00:32, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
- The point is that the whole website is *really* whitewashed to the point of unbelievability, and I don't think we're meant to take everything on it as unbiased gospel truth. Even if they're not outright killing people, it's pretty doubtful that they've never had legal tangles with anyone, or political scandals, etc. The website depicts the company as being literally perfect, and even Weyland's actions in 'Prometheus' show that that's not the case. It's pretty typical of corporate websites - compare any "about us" section on a major corporate website with its corresponding Wikipedia article, for example. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 02:08, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
- "Just a reminder that the Weyland timeline (and entire website) is certainly not an unbiased source, and that's probably worth recognizing. It's very clearly written to paint Weyland and his company in the absolute best possible light, and could arguably be seen as "revisionist history". There's literally no mention anywhere of any sort of lawsuits, questionable activities, anything that would reflect poorly on the Company. You mean we're supposed to believe that the Company never did anything questionable or objectionable, ever?"
- The company's business practices have absolutely nothing to do with this debate. Refraining from mentioning any illegal dealings you may be involved in on your website is a far cry from lying about how you came into existence. Doing the latter would serve no realistic purpose, anyone could check public business records to disprove it (were this a contemporary real-world corporation).
- Let's not beat around the bush here, you keep saying you disagree with the information for this reason and that, but the fact is, that is the official information. And thus far you haven't actually posted anything to back up your argument, just mentioned reasons you personally disagree with what, like it or not, is official information. I'm not having a go at you, but this debate is dragging on and on when you aren't actually providing any real sources to back up your suggestions. So unless you can, this should just be dropped.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 08:38, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
- No, I disagree with *your interpretation* of what's arguably already biased information, and object to it being used as the objective truth in this article just because you said it. I've already shown how some of the same sources you've provided (along with some others, such as the info regarding 'Predators') can be used to draw a different conclusion from your opinion.
- Hence the compromise I mentioned earlier, which The Cruentus already agreed was a good idea.
- And yes, writing your own timeline absolutely has to do with talking about how your company came into existence, for the "revisionist history" reason I mentioned earlier. If you can write your own origin story, independent of the actual facts, and your company controls the media and is arguably the largest corporation in human existence, it would be trivial to, say, disregard information about Charles Weyland.
- As mentioned, the timeline is written in such a way that it allows for multiple interpretations, and allows for the existence of 'AvP' without outright confirming it. We should at least acknowledge those multiple interpretations, even if we acknowledge the possibility of a contradiction. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 15:55, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
- If we're going to start throwing out information because it may not be the "total truth", then most of the stuff on this wiki can go by that logic. What's to stop me from saying that any in-universe source was lying? Requiring an editor to prove a negative is exactly the opposite of how a wiki works. So either cite a source that disproves the timeline or step aside. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 17:29, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
I already did cite a source: 'AvP' itself. As mentioned, presuming that the timeline retcons it out of existence (especially given the ambiguity of the timeline) is circular reasoning. There's no reason that the two can't coexist.
Also, examining sources for their content and context is kind of a cornerstone of critical thinking, which I'd say is a bit more important than parroting (questionable) information verbatim. The Weyland website is explicitly written like a whitewashed corporate document meant to paint the Company in the best light possible, and it's about a fictional company with a long and storied history within the franchise as being extremely shady, if not outright malicious. The website offers up an idealized depiction of the Company and of the Prometheus mission, which ultimately isn't actually supported by the movie itself (and is in line with how the Company is depicted in the other Alien movies). The whitewashed nature of the website's content is one giant in-joke for people familiar with Weyland-Yutani and real-life corporate culture, and not recognizing that shows a pretty huge lack of understanding of the Company and does a pretty big disservice to one of the core messages of the first 3 movies in the series (and to a somewhat lesser extent, 'Prometheus' as well).
By your reasoning, I guess Michael Bishop/Bishop II was telling the truth when he told Ripley that they were going to take the Queen out of her on Fury 161? There's nothing to indicate that he was lying, after all. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 21:32, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
Ok gentlemen if there are no other sources being brought up and posted here, then let us move on to the quote by Damon Lindef or whatever his name was again. We can discuss that and then we can talk about a compromise if its needed. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 22:04, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
- So we're only going off of the Lindelof quote, unless someone finds something else that's relevant? Just want to be on the same page. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 01:28, June 16, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not saying we discount it, just that we acknowledge its shortcomings instead of just blindly parroting it. That was the point of the compromise I talked about further up the page. :) Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 03:49, June 16, 2013 (UTC)
- And yet you can't provide any evidence that it has any shortcomings. You haven't provided a single contradictory reference. As I said, unless you can provide a source that backs up your reasons for not taking it as it is, you're argument has no backup and sounds more like personal prejudice more than reasoned debate.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 15:46, June 16, 2013 (UTC)
- @Xenomrph: I agree with you about the timeline, I am also under the impression that while we are reading it that we should read it as if we are part of that universe. If this is the case it makes since also that the person reading it is also part of the Weyland corp American branch based on information presented on the page, demographic slang.
- @Leigh Burne :Why are we ignoring Jon Spaihts comment that AvP is part of the Alien mythology? That is a signficant statement to make in regards to wheter AvP is canon or not. Besides what Fox has done or said on the matter what is their in Prometheus that would retcon AvP. Their really isn't anything their and infact their infromation within the movie that confirms that AvP and AvP:R still happend. I have mentioned it before one being that they carried over the fact that the Yutani corp was not merged with Weyland Industries. Their should be a big list made of all the inconstances that people think are in Prometheus that make AvP noncanon because I am sure they can be debunked.белая армия 00:44, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- The evidence is right there in the website, and the movies. No offense, but you'd have to be blind not to see it. It's very clearly intentionally written as a whitewashed corporate document, omitting anything that might paint Weyland Corp in a bad light. It portrays the Prometheus mission as being this paragon of science and discovery, when the actual mission as shown in the movie is anything but, and ends up being one old man's thinly-veiled vanity project to achieve immortality at the expense of the lives of everyone around him (which is in line with the "corporate selfishness" motif present in the first 3 Alien movies).
- Especially when you consider that Weyland Corp is the largest corporation in human history with its tentacles in literally every facet of human existence, and it's a textbook case of negationism. So you mean to tell me that in the company's 80-odd-year existence as of the timeline's "present", they've never engaged in anything objectionable, never had any legal tanglings, never stepped on the toes of any political entities, never had any questionable financial dealings, no controversies, nothing whatsoever? If nothing else that doesn't jive with how Weyland himself is portrayed in 'Prometheus', which by itself proves that the website's content is unreliable.
- The best comparison I can come up with is Apple Inc.'s website. It's all clean and sterile and makes the company look great, and you won't find any of this stuff anywhere on it. One of the major themes of the Alien franchise is corporate untrustworthiness... and you want to trust an over-exaggerated, propagandized, fictional corporate document that's clearly written to poke fun at corporate culture? Really? :P
- Yes, we should move on to the quote. One thing I will say though is that Weyland corp did have some issues, apparently Yutani filed a lawsuit against them but I am not sure if this info is sourced or not, I will check where I last saw it tomorrow. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 03:31, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- You're thinking of this bit:
- After years of litigation, Weyland wins the David patent lawsuit against the Japanese start-up Yutani Corporation, effectively protecting the investments of both Weyland Industries and its shareholders.
- December 12, 2029
- You'll notice that the wording points out that Weyland Corp both initiated and won the lawsuit, and that Yutani was apparently in the wrong, and makes sure to point out that in winning it, they protected their shareholders (an appeal to personal emotion - basically, "the Company cares about your well-being"). Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 03:55, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- I already threw in my own two cents regarding the quote, but to reiterate: The way that Lindelof immediately jumps all over distancing himself from the whole canon-non-canon argument, even though that really wasn't what the question was asking, makes it seem like he knows full well that the two stories conflict, although obviously he recognises it's not his place to set the record straight. The quote also makes it clear that Ridley was contemptuous of AVP's mythos, and that he was not concerned with following it. When he was told that Peter Weyland was a character that had previously appeared, albeit in another form, in AVP, he clearly didn't care, and certainly didn't intend to change his character to better gel with the earlier movie. At the very least that quote certainly doesn't back up the 'they're related' argument in any way.--Leigh Burne(talk) (Contribs) 13:55, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
The thing is, Ridley's opinion of the mythos doesn't matter since he doesn't own the franchise - I already gave the example of Robert Rodriguez and 'Predators' ignoring 'AvP', and how little that ended up mattering. Ridley's opinion that AvP doesn't matter doesn't instantly invalidate it, especially when 'Prometheus' by itself doesn't contradict 'AvP' (and we've already shown that the corporate timeline can be interpreted various ways and can't be cited as a definitive source).
Let Ridley have his opinion - it doesn't mean we need to be beholden to it. You'll also notice that the Lindelof quote (much like the Weyland timeline) neither confirms nor denies 'AvP'. They both dodge the topic entirely, in essence leaving it to the individual as to whether or not they still want to accept 'AvP' or not. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 14:18, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- Don't forget folks, Fox approved of what Ridley and Co did, had they disagreed then they would have interfered like they have done before. Take from that what you will but we need to reach a consensus soon. To add my own input on that quote, it does seem like Ridley wants to ignore the issue or simply doesn't care and wants to do things his own way, yes the topic there was avoided by both Damon and Ridley but ultimately he did do it his way and Fox did nothing about it and they are usually notorious for butting in, hence why there were no Xenomorphs in Prometheus. So either they over-looked it, did not care or approved it.
- What is your interpretation of that quote Xeno? You said so far that it is just Ridley's opinion, what else do you make of the quote? Just to point something out as well Xeno, the AVP series multimedia and so on is not really in danger of getting erased or invalidated, its just the AVP films, namely the Weyland character and company that is in conflict with Prometheus's versions. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 15:22, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- @Leigh Burne: Their is nothing about Peter Weylands character nor his actions that cause a contradiction with the AvP movies. We have gone over the time line and their is only infromation their that shows that it they still happend.
- Agian I am going to ask why are you ignoreing Jon Spaihts comment about AvP being in the Alien mythology? As for why Fox would alow somthing to be contradictory to be made in the Prometheus movie, I would have to say their is a comment that was made by fox that they don't mind inconistances between movies as long as the canon as whole is not broken, thats why Prometheus was alowed to be writen to contradict Alien Aliens and Alien 3.
- I was told to post this and I think it adds greatly to this talk. You have to forgive me I copied this right off their page and it might look like Stoole now.
- Alien vs Aliens
- 1) The escape craft Ripley is found is shorter and thicker than it was in Alien.
- 2) Ripleys helmet has a mounted light source on it even though it never did in Alien.
- 3) Kane never never never ever told anyone how many alien eggs he saw in the derelict, yet Ripley claims he saw thousands of eggs.
- 4) By sheer bad luck the Aliens are found right after Ripley was, even though W.Y. should have found them earlier.
- Aliens vs Alien 3
- 1) The marine ship is now brown instead of dark grey.
- 2) Everything in the Marine ship has been heavily remodeled.
- 3) The Marine ships computer never should have a British accent but a Northern North American accent.
- 4) The Marines should be from the Americas not from the British Empire.
- 5) The Pulse Rifle sounds majorly different.
- 6) The Pulse Rifle with one Round should had killed the one survivor of the movie because A) It fires a 10mm armor piercing steel explosive shell, B) because of the nature of the shell will always hit an artery and their was a big one in his knee were he was shot.
- 7) W.Y. could have sent many many people at lv-426 at any time because Fury 161 is in the same solar system as lv-426, and some how they never received the space jockey sos. Heck that complex was built and retired before the colonist came too lv-426. The prison was built and used to make led insulation, yet W.Y. didn't send any of these people over to LV-426 which is practically right next door to fury 161.
- Alien 3 vs Alien Resurrection.
- 1) Only one hiccup between this movie and Alien 3. Their is no reason that the doctor on Fury 161 should have Ripleys blood in storage because he cant even test the blood for infections/diseases. He says to the warden, after examining newts body, that he can't be sure if she had a infectious disease for sure because he doesn't have a proper laboratory.
- Alien vs Aliens
- Prometheus vs Alien vs Aliens vs Alien 3.
- 1)The jockeys trans port the Xenomorphs in their most basic default form (Black goo) instead in Alien they show them transport the Aliens in a evolved set up.
- Prometheus vs Alien vs Aliens vs Alien 3.
- 2)The space Jockey wears a suit that makes it look like it has the head of a biomecahnical helmet. The space jocky in Alien and avp does have a trunk. Before you say, but your looking at a helmet, you can see it mouth wide open and it has teeth.
- 3) The Space Jockey is smaller than the one in Alien.
- 4) You can here the jockey speaking (radio signal) in Alien yet the ones in Prometheus sound much more human.
- 5) The one guy that survived in Alien made a deal with God to live forever, God is not a Space Jockey, not only that but the space jockeys action would completely contradict Jesus message and Revelations.
- 6) The technology level that humans have is greater than what is shown in alien, and Aliens. It is some what excusable that the Prometheus would have advanced equipment aboard it, more so than the Nostromo, but the Promtheus was built 90 plus years before the Marines ship, and yet it is more advanced. As most people should know the Military has access to technology that is more advanced than what civilians have, by the time civilians have something like what the military had, the military has moved on too something better.
- I am just going to throw in my own observation of one major contradiction. Prometheus has humans using technology that can let people see peoples thoughts and dreams. If this equipment existed it would change the way law enforcement works we would probably not need lawyers anymore, the system could process the guilty and innocent faster. It would also change how the story of Aliens would have happend because they would have used this device on Ripley during her court case and would have seen through her thoughts and dreams that she was not lying about the Alien.
- белая армия 20:47, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
- "Kane never never never ever told anyone how many alien eggs he saw in the derelict, yet Ripley claims he saw thousands of eggs."
- Actually he did say something like that, he said that he saw "dozens of leathery-like objects, like eggs or something" I would need to watch it again for confirmation.
- The helmet in Prometheus does have a mouth like part to it (just under the trunk, check the images out) like the Alien one did, its just more "closed" than the one in Alien and in a better state.
- "I was told to post this and I think it adds greatly to this talk. You have to forgive me I copied this right off their page and it might look like Stoole now."
- And who might that be? Why can't they come here and say it themselves?
- Also the space-jockey thing has nothing to do with this debate, it should belong on the other talk page that we are having a discussion on.
- I believe I said that we should be discussing the quote by Damon, and to see if there is a possible compromise. So lets keep to it please. 21:15, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
I took the Lindelof quote to mean that Ridley Scott was going to tell the story he wanted to tell, no matter what it conflicted with (and this includes his own film, 'Alien', which Prometheus *does* conflict with on certain points - and Ridley Scott himself has even acknowledged this). Lindelof bringing up 'AvP' to Ridley, and Ridley's subsequent reaction, came across more as "why should I give a shit?", rather than any malicious "I'm going to go out of my way to contradict AvP BECAUSE I HATE IT." or anything like that. I don't think Ridley Scott would care either way - he got to make the movie he wanted to make, and it stands on its own just fine, independent of anything else or whether 'AvP' exists or not. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 04:03, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- A fine post Xeno but that is what Leigh was trying to say I believe, that Ridley simply did not care and was going to do things his own way no matter what and was not interested in trying to be compatible with Charles and WI which is something we can all agree on at least. As for Alien, if the contradiction you meant is the Ship and Suit design, then you must note that the ship was not the same one, its cargo was also entirely different. The suit design being different can be theorized in a few ways but that would be speculation, so I won't say anything on that for now, anyway if that is all you folks got to say on the Quote, then we should talk about what comes next and see if we can reach a consensus.
- Careful with the language by the way as we are trying to make sure talk pages and blogs are void of swearing, though some words may be tolerated but not the extreme ones, yours was not the worst word so don't worry XD. Someone else recently said it as well and I was going to comment on it but I'm not sure if the rule is in effect yet as its something that us admins were still discussing, though it was agreed that we will disallow it in talk pages and blogs So I guess it should be in effect. This does not include sources, because some interviews tend to be full of swear words. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 21:09, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- @Xenomrph: and the funny thing is in the end after watching AvP Ridley Scott said he thought it was briliant.
- Needless to say though their are a lot of contradictions within the regular films, more of them compaired to what people claim about the AvP movies.
- Most of the contradictions, including the one I wrote where not addressed and the ones that where well I will respond too here. Kain only said he saw dozens Ripley said thousands in Aliens making that a contradiction. Now a lot of us on AvPgalx.net have seen the picture of the Pilot in Alien and Prometheus and the mouth on the Pilot in alien is a real mouth, the one in Prometheus is part of the helmet.
- I am going to ask this agian why is the comment from Jon Spaihts being ignored? Why are the refrences that exist in the AvP two pack for Prometheus being ignored?
- "I am going to ask this agian why is the comment from Jon Spaihts being ignored? Why are the refrences that exist in the AvP two pack for Prometheus being ignored?"
- Presumably because no one here has cited them yet, simply saying something such as "avp two pack" and citing the actual source is two different things, I said earlier in this debate that words are meaningless without sources, especially if it is about changing a page as this is a wiki after all. You can make a new section about it if you wish and then cite the sources.
- "Most of the contradictions, including the one I wrote where not addressed and the ones that where well I will respond too here. Kain only said he saw dozens Ripley said thousands in Aliens making that a contradiction. Now a lot of us on AvPgalx.net have seen the picture of the Pilot in Alien and Prometheus and the mouth on the Pilot in alien is a real mouth, the one in Prometheus is part of the helmet."
- Also I said to keep this on topic, the quote by Damon was to be discussed, not a debate on space jockeys or eggs, which have their own talk pages, one of which is currently active. Xeno and Leigh have said their peace on the Damon matter so unless you going to say your own opinion on the matter, do not back track or bring other debated subjects here as it will just cause a vicious circle and cause others to reply to the posts that are not apart of the current discussion (Damon quote) and as a consequence, will drag this debate out even further. Now your post about the contradictions was relevant because there are many, many contradictions but the discussion has since moved on from that and back tracking will just stall the debate. Now we have started discussing the quote, so unless you have something to add to that such as your own interpretation of the quote, we shall move on to what needs to be done now and maybe reach a consensus. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 01:39, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
- It is only for the talk pages and blogs because despite the wiki subject, kids are able to sign up to wikis, also it is just a matter of good etiquette, politeness and to make sure no one gets offended. Some people are easily offended by profanity and when it comes to debates, things can get out of hand real fast when people start swearing at one another or for simply just swearing (which didn't happen here obviously but I'm just saying it can happen). What you said was not that bad though (just don't make it a habit XD) and it would be the more badder profanity that we would watch for so no apology needed, plus you were not aware of that rule, which I was not sure if it was in effect or not, So no worries there my friend.
The quote and what is needed nowEdit
- I see the quote as largely irrelevant for the scope of this wiki - it might be worth pointing it out in a "behind the scenes" section so readers get a sense of what the filmmaker's thoughts were, but we'd leave it up to the readers to make the decision for themselves if that actually changes anything. Maybe a header for the article "MOTHER IS STILL COLLATING" or something like that, to clarify that multiple sources could be interpreted as being contradictory, etc. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 05:10, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
- Just made a new section here, as its starting to get really long now and by that I mean this debate and not something else. XD
- The information that is cited with that source is in the trivia section already, I can post it here so we can have a look at it if you want. As a for a header, good call Xeno, I do believe we have a template tag for that. I will try and find it and if its an agreement by all, we can place it on the page and see about looking over the info that is in the trivia.
- Do you agree with this C.O.A (course of action) Leigh? The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 14:23, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
- Before I begin with my response to a response, I just found the quote that is being talked about, it comes from this website.
- I found out that the guy that made the comment that you are talking about made this comment right before it. The last sentence is the real signficant part.
- Were you familiar with every single film in the Alien franchise down to the Alien Vs. Predator movies?
I have to be completely honest with you. I’ve seen Alien Vs. Predator but I have not seen Alien Vs. Predator: Requiem. I only saw Alien Vs. Predator once and in my researching at the time that I took the Prometheus job, I made a purposeful effort to not rewatch any of the Alien movies or go on Wikipedia and explore them. I felt like my memory of them was going to have to suffice. If the goal was to make this feel original and new and fresh, and obviously acknowledge those previous films, I did not want to be beholden to them.
- Were you familiar with every single film in the Alien franchise down to the Alien Vs. Predator movies?
- When they made Prometheus that did not want to write it in such a way that it was not obliged to stick with canon 100%, all of the alien movies not just AvP.
- If the issue is that you are saying I am lying about the refrences in those special features than I suggest you PLEASE go rent them. Apparently most of the stuff on all the blu-ray and 3D discs sets where not bought because they are AvP movies OR because people feal 3D is a dead end high priced clich. So that being said that is why I am able to tell you and other people information they do not know about.
- I also will be making more points using the discs because they are the more recent interviews and you can be sure that the person saying what is and what isn't is saying what they are saying. These quotes online we can't be sure who are saying them. I only use quotes online if I have red or seen them in a magizne or watched the person say those things.
- Lastly if we ignore that the other movies have bad inconsistency but choose only too rip apart the AvP movies or even anything else in these works then this makes the wiki really biased and in a way that is agianst itself.
- "Were you familiar with every single film in the Alien franchise down to the Alien Vs. Predator movies?
I have to be completely honest with you. I’ve seen Alien Vs. Predator but I have not seen Alien Vs. Predator: Requiem."
- "Were you familiar with every single film in the Alien franchise down to the Alien Vs. Predator movies?
- AVP:R did not have a Charles Weyland or his company in it which is the only thing in the AVP film (that I can think of anyway) conflicting with Prometheus, this is not an entire film series debate. Other inconsistencies was made earlier and the point was made, the series is indeed full of them and they get discussed on their talk pages or in blogs, right now we are trying to finish this up, I will be posting the cited info that is in the trivia, I assume this is what is being called into question.
- "I felt like my memory of them was going to have to suffice. If the goal was to make this feel original and new and fresh, and obviously acknowledge those previous films, I did not want to be beholden to them."
- Only proves the point, that they ignored WI and CW, in order to make their own story but I'm glad you posted that as it sheds more light on it but it does still show that they went their own way from my view anyway. I would like to hear other's opinions on that part.
- "If the issue is that you are saying I am lying about the refrences in those special features than I suggest you PLEASE go rent them."
- No, I am saying cite them, a fairly easy task to do. This is a wiki, not a place where anything goes.
- "I also will be making more points using the discs because they are the more recent interviews and you can be sure that the person saying what is and what isn't is saying what they are saying."
- As long as its cited and in another section, right now we want either your view on the quote and/or your suggestion on about the page. I would not mind one bit if you had more to add about the other contradictions so long as its in another section, that way, we can finish up here and debate there as well.:)
- "Apparently most of the stuff on all the blu-ray and 3D discs sets where not bought because they are AvP movies OR because people feal 3D is a dead end high priced clich."
- I happen to have both AVP films despite my dislike of the second film so its nothing to do with what it is. Both of them was the special edition, but not the blu-ray. What you got to realize is that not everyone who likes the franchise is going to buy the very same DVDs that they probably already got just because it happens to be blu-ray or 3D or have extra special features, however, knowledge of newer behind the scenes would help if they get cited.
- "Lastly if we ignore that the other movies have bad inconsistency but choose only too rip apart the AvP movies or even anything else in these works then this makes the wiki really biased and in a way that is agianst itself"
- As I said before, it was relevant but you should have posted it sooner, we have moved on from that and we trying to reach a consensus and you're back tracking. A debate waits for no man, it progresses and things get done or it gets nowhere and things get out of hand, so please only respond if you want to progress this debate by adding your interpretation of the quote or a suggestion for the page. We are not ignoring other movies and this wiki is not biased but if we are debating about a certain subject then it pays well to actually stay on that subject, savvy? that way things get done. This debate was only ever about Weyland Industries/Charles Weyland vs. Weyland Corp/Peter and whether to change the page. It had nothing to do with the other films or space jockeys. Its good to point out other inconsistencies to make a point, it really is but we are not debating them. I'm glad you posted that about the quote, now all I want to know now is your interpretation of it or whether you agree to a compromise like having a header or a tweaking of the info in trivia. So far I am glad everyone here is keeping calm and not going crazy with the debate, this is how debates should be (though less delayed) and not people insulting one another or losing their tempers.
- Right this is the info that is in the trivia: Weyland Industries bears no relation to Weyland Corp from the movie Prometheus, and has essentially been retconned by that movie's production. When Prometheus writer Damon Lindelof pointed this out to director Ridley Scott during the film's production, Scott made it clear that he had no intention of following the timeline laid out in the Alien vs. Predator films.
That part in the trivia section is pretty biased. At the very least I'd drop that first sentence, or at least heavily reword it to something like "Weyland Industries from 'Prometheus' can be interpreted as being unrelated to Weyland Corp from 'AvP'. According to Damon Lindelof, Ridley Scott made it clear that he had no intention of following the timeline laid out in the Alien vs. Predator films." or something to that effect. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 07:46, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
- How about this: "Weyland Corp and it's founder Peter Weyland appear to contradict the Weyland Industries origin portrayed in Alien vs. Predator. When Prometheus writer Damon Lindelof pointed this out to director Ridley Scott during the film's production, Scott made it clear that he had no intention of following the timeline laid out in the Alien vs. Predator films.[REFERENCE HERE] It remains to be seen if this is an official retcon of events." That makes it pretty clear there's been no official word either way, and yet that the available evidence backs up the concept.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 09:36, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
- I do not agree. The reason I have been pointing those errors out is to point out that canon works diffrently in this fictional universe. Fox is ok with inconistances as long as their is something in the story that keeps the stories unified, none of the stories violate this fundamental rule, not even the games and comics. Here are my other refrences.
- Gearbox Chief Creative Officer Brian Martel
- Fox has been great to work with and SEGA has been a good partner in building the bridges between developer and IP holder. Fox is a little more flexible with the canon than other companies out there, but they do have to be careful not to annoy directors – if you put together a proposition that assumes a particular film never happened, the director isn’t going to like that very much and Fox may have plans to work with them again in the future.'We’re able to introduce our own elements that we feel are right for the interactive space, whether that’s weapons or new types of aliens, and we’re aware that in doing so we’re adding to the existing canon.
21:07, June 20, 2013 (UTC)белая армия
- Saying a director would be annoyed that his film got retconned in NO WAY proves it hasn't happened.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 07:39, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
- Also I don't think Fox cares about annoying the directors, after Alien 3 the director would not work with Fox for awhile.
- So you don't think we should have a header, ok but what about the rest of you, what do you think? The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 14:39, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
- That's a good point, Fox screwed David Fincher to the point where he's completely disowned the existence of Alien3 altogether, and the studio doesn't seem particularly bothered about that.
- As I said, the reworded statement undeniably makes it clear it is not a concrete fact, so I don't think it needs some additional header to point out what it already says. (Where would the header go anyway? It's only this one trivia entry that's being questioned, the rest of the page is entirely accurate to what is shown in the film and related materials.) Besides, several pages on this wiki have less-than concrete "information" included in their trivia section without any kind of special header. That's all fine if you ask me (and a big part of what these specialist wikis are about), so as long as the wording of the statement doesn't imply it's hard truth I think it's fine.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 14:53, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
- What I highlighted was the important part. That Fox is much more flexable with canon than other companies. Which goes hand in hand with the comment made by the writer from Prometheus that the movie Prometheus was not going to follow to the letter what was laid down in the movie Alien, Aliens, Alien 3, Alien Resurection, AvP, and AvP:R. белая армия 21:57, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
- OK unless someone is going to post about the header then this debate is now over, the page has been agreed that it would be tweaked and it has, the purpose of this debate has now been fulfilled and so this is now concluded, any posts after this must either be about the header or in be another section as it may be removed for being off-topic. So last chance to have an opinion on the header, Leigh has said his peace, so Xeno and Отомстить you must now add your two cents and either agree or disagree with what Leigh said or not post since after about a few days, this debate will automatically be considered over with. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 21:26, June 22, 2013 (UTC)