That is precisely my point, both sources contradict each other. The fact of the matter is that the queen-hybrid seen in AvP:R was created through a normal Facehugger, which begs to question how is that possible. Obviousely, it's in the film so it's not a matter of if it exist or not, but it is inconsistant with other methods that had previousely been established,which should be noted on the page.
As far as the Queen not looking the same in Alien3, well logically speaking if it was spawned from a human then it should look the same as the Queen seen in Aliens which was very likely spawned from a human.
- There are a lot of inconsistencies in the franchise, especially the expanded universe. But if we take just the films by themselves, every Queen we've seen (except the Predalien) looks the same, and every one of those has come from a human (Aliens, Alien Resurrection and Alien vs. Predator). No real inconsistency there. The Royal Facehugger is only in the Assembly Cut of Alien3, so if we take the theatrical cut as canon, there's no inconsistency with which Facehugger can lay a Queen, either.--Leigh Burne (Talk) (Contribs) 12:47, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
- We never saw the Queen birthed from a human in Alien vs Predator, we do know however, that it is thousands if not millions of years old, likely brought onto the planet from another location. Point being is there is a problem with the origins and appearance of the Queen and it should be added for educational purpose if nothing else.
- We don't know that at all. The Queen in Alien vs. Predator is ancient, yes, but so is the temple she is held in. The film explicitly states the temple used to be a human city, and that those humans were used to breed the Aliens the Predators would fight. It's never suggested the Queen couldn't have come from one of those people. Maybe she was brought to Earth from elsewhere, but I don't remember the film ever suggesting that. It left it ambiguous.
- Exactly, the film states the temple was used for rites of passage yes, but it never touched on the subject of how the Queen was created, it's not even suggested. Is it possible that the Queen was born from a human? Possibly, but there's no evidence to support that. What we do know from the expanded universe is that Predators would capture Queens from hives and transport them to other locations and use them for rites of passage at their temples in other locations and planets. Following this, it's logical to assume, and yes it is an assumption, that the same thing was done to the Queen on the temple in Alien vs Predator.
- Yeah, I had previousely added material to it, but it was removed. As long as everyone is okay with it then I'll expand on it again.
- "Is it possible that the Queen was born from a human? Possibly, but there's no evidence to support that."
- Yes there is. It looks like the Queens in Aliens and Alien Resurrection, which definitely came from people. The one in Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem came from a Predator and looks different. So the one in Alien vs. Predator was presumably human-spawned too.
- As for the expanded universe, I always take that with a pinch of salt because it's so loaded with contradictions. Not to mention Fox are apparently jettisoning all of the old EU material in favour of starting over with the films as a base. The most recent novels and the Fire and Stone comics form part of that new EU. Everything else is apparently being retconned or just ignored.--Leigh Burne (Talk) (Contribs) 13:38, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
- That's just an assumption though, we never saw it occur and goes to show that Queens may still always appear as a Queen, other the the Hybrid which is apart of the contridaction of the expanded universe. That would mean that every single Queen (and empress) ever seen would all have to be human spawned even the Matriach. Which is all highly unlikely.
- And really? I didn't hear about that, that's pretty lame.
- It is an assumption, yes, but based on the evidence of the films, it is an entirely reasonable one. The films prove Queens don't always look the same, because of Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. The EU may contradict that, but the EU on here has always been secondary to the films. The films are considered top of the pile when it comes to what is canon. The reason for that is trying to reconcile everything would be impossible because there are just too many things in the EU that don't work given what we see in the films. That doesn't mean everything from the EU is ignored, of course. But it's a very tricky situation.
- Supposedly that's what is happening. There hasn't been any official announcement or anything, but allegedly the studio wants to start afresh and create an EU that fits around the films. So far they've had the books Out of the Shadows, Seas of Sorrows and soon River of Pain, the game Alien: Isolation, and the new comics that are running currently, and soon they are going to be doing more novels set post-Resurrection.--Leigh Burne (Talk) (Contribs) 13:53, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
- Even in the films though there are inconsistancy. Such as with the Directors Cut of Alien 3 (naturally). But even Alien3 itself has many unanwered questions as to how a Facehugger was even boarded on the Sulaco among others. A:CM attempted to answer that, but created more plot holes than anything else. All we can really do is give the information that we have and a lot of it is inconsistent. Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem is also a spinoff cross over film as is AvP. So it is difficult like you mentioned. But like you said, it is still debated and just needed to be expanded on so it's all good and such.
- I really hope they don't screw up any of the already established material though. It's a big pet peeve of mine when people backtrack stories like that.
- Again though, the Assembly Cut of Alien3 isn't the 'official' version of the movie, and contradicts the theatrical version (which is). That's why story elements related to it are mentioned under separate subsections on the relevant pages on Xenopedia. The only extended cut from the Alien series that can be regarded as official is the Special Edition of Aliens, because James Cameron has confirmed it is the version he wanted to release originally. Nothing in it contradicts the theatrical version, the preceding film or the sequels, it merely expands upon the existing story unobtrusively. Plus elements from it (the sentry guns) were used in Aliens: Colonial Marines. The other alternate film versions all have scenes that don't really fit the overall continuity (especially Alien and Alien3).
- Yes but that was what David Fincher had intended for the film, it was only the producers that fought with him and made him redo virtually everything. He talks about it in his interviews about how they fought with him on all of his decisions and fired him three times. He even states that he hates the theatrical version as it's not what he had intended it to be or what he wanted.
- It's so strange, because the theatrical version itself has so many plotholes that are filled in with the Assembly version, though there are still some problems with it. It's kind of funny in a strange way.
- It'll definitely be difficult for them, I have a lot of the older 90's comics and stuff. I'm personally very concerned with the Prometheus sequel.
- "Yes but that was what David Fincher had intended for the film, it was only the producers that fought with him and made him redo virtually everything."
- The only person who knows what Fincher truly intended for the film is Fincher himself, I'm sure he made changes during production as well. For example, I've heard that it was his idea to have the Alien simply kill all of its victims instead of cocooning some of them alive. The truth is we'll never know what was changed by the studio and what was changed simply because Fincher wanted to change it. If he had personally created the alternate cut in 2003 that would have lent it some additional credence, but he declined to be involved and we have to go with what we have. As it stands the Assembly Cut is nothing more than an unofficial alternate version, a "what-if?". (I actually much prefer it to the theatrical cut, but my own personal opinion is irrelevant, the theatrical release has to be considered official.)--Leigh Burne (Talk) (Contribs) 15:14, November 20, 2014 (UTC)