now of course it turns out that Burke doesn't actually care about the Xenomorphs, he only wants to exploit them for profit. while this is keeping with the corporations=bad theme from the first movie, now we're supposed to think corporations are bad for... not wanting to do genocide?
The corporation is bad because they want to use the aliens as biological weapons and sent Ripley's crew and the colonists to the planet as guinea pigs. That's why the middle manager wants to keep them alive.
I would argue that Aliens does have a more complicated morality than you're suggesting.
the audience is expected to view that position as inherently wrong.
In my view, Ripley wanting to wipe all the aliens out may not be the most moral reaction to experiencing all her co-workers being killed by a sexual assault monster and then witnessing the aftermath of hundreds of people being slaughtered by that species of sexual assault monsters, but I think it is understandable that she'd feel that way. The thing is that the movie actually does call into question whether this is the right thing to do when it draws an explicit parallel between the alien queen and Ripley- the queen is protecting its offspring in the same way that Ripley is protecting her surrogate daughter, which complicates the morality of this conflict and its result. In the end, the entire conflict is the result of a corporation seeking profit, creating a situation that spiralled out of control.
It's why I compare it to Avatar- James Cameron understands that people's moral decisions aren't usually the result of taking a view from a divine perch of perfect politics, but from an accumulation of their experiences and the material reality they face. Jake Sully is not the hero of Avatar because he's a great person- if he still had his legs and was just hired as a grunt on Pandora then he would have been just another genocidal colonial soldier. He had a very specific set of experiences that made him sympathize with the Na'Vi, and Ripley had a set of experiences that led to all her actions in all the movies. Like, sympathizing with the Xenomorphs or valuing their existence would be really hard for anyone who had to actually deal with them.
It’s not honest. It’s not their home planet. If you watch Alien a different species crash lands a ship that is infested with xenomorphic eggs. They are a parasitic species that work like a virus.
The corporations want to utilize the parasitic species to dominate other nations, or create new weapons.
If your dog went into a lake and got a tapeworm, are you gonna let it do its thing, or kill the tape worm to save the dog?
No,but you see,the tapeworm is a valuable form of life that the arrogant dog only encountered by acting on its hubris,traipsing in its natural habitat and expecting not to be used as a host for a parasitic lifeform
“I know that it's not the Zionists original home, but it has become their home after being brought there” - you on Palestine I guess.
If you watch the directors cut an egg hatched and locked on to Newts dad and that started the species growth on the planet. Considering that in Alien they get back to the space ship before it hatches in the crew mates body, you could make the argument that they weren’t conscious on the planet at any point before killing Newts dad.
So no they weren’t “there” long before the humans. They legitimately need hosts to go through their developmental process. There is no peaceful existence with xenomorphs. If you aren’t being dishonest to make an argument, than you are being incredibly silly.
I don't feel like writing a whole thing but I think you've really misinterpreted the movie. But I'll just say that Aliens and Avatar are the same movie, both equally as anti-capitalist or anti-imperialist as Hollywood blockbusters are allowed to be.
deleted by creator
Okay, I shouldn't be commenting more but:
The corporation is bad because they want to use the aliens as biological weapons and sent Ripley's crew and the colonists to the planet as guinea pigs. That's why the middle manager wants to keep them alive.
deleted by creator
I would argue that Aliens does have a more complicated morality than you're suggesting.
In my view, Ripley wanting to wipe all the aliens out may not be the most moral reaction to experiencing all her co-workers being killed by a sexual assault monster and then witnessing the aftermath of hundreds of people being slaughtered by that species of sexual assault monsters, but I think it is understandable that she'd feel that way. The thing is that the movie actually does call into question whether this is the right thing to do when it draws an explicit parallel between the alien queen and Ripley- the queen is protecting its offspring in the same way that Ripley is protecting her surrogate daughter, which complicates the morality of this conflict and its result. In the end, the entire conflict is the result of a corporation seeking profit, creating a situation that spiralled out of control.
It's why I compare it to Avatar- James Cameron understands that people's moral decisions aren't usually the result of taking a view from a divine perch of perfect politics, but from an accumulation of their experiences and the material reality they face. Jake Sully is not the hero of Avatar because he's a great person- if he still had his legs and was just hired as a grunt on Pandora then he would have been just another genocidal colonial soldier. He had a very specific set of experiences that made him sympathize with the Na'Vi, and Ripley had a set of experiences that led to all her actions in all the movies. Like, sympathizing with the Xenomorphs or valuing their existence would be really hard for anyone who had to actually deal with them.
It’s not honest. It’s not their home planet. If you watch Alien a different species crash lands a ship that is infested with xenomorphic eggs. They are a parasitic species that work like a virus.
The corporations want to utilize the parasitic species to dominate other nations, or create new weapons.
If your dog went into a lake and got a tapeworm, are you gonna let it do its thing, or kill the tape worm to save the dog?
So dishonest
No,but you see,the tapeworm is a valuable form of life that the arrogant dog only encountered by acting on its hubris,traipsing in its natural habitat and expecting not to be used as a host for a parasitic lifeform
deleted by creator
“I know that it's not the Zionists original home, but it has become their home after being brought there” - you on Palestine I guess.
If you watch the directors cut an egg hatched and locked on to Newts dad and that started the species growth on the planet. Considering that in Alien they get back to the space ship before it hatches in the crew mates body, you could make the argument that they weren’t conscious on the planet at any point before killing Newts dad.
So no they weren’t “there” long before the humans. They legitimately need hosts to go through their developmental process. There is no peaceful existence with xenomorphs. If you aren’t being dishonest to make an argument, than you are being incredibly silly.
I don't feel like writing a whole thing but I think you've really misinterpreted the movie. But I'll just say that Aliens and Avatar are the same movie, both equally as anti-capitalist or anti-imperialist as Hollywood blockbusters are allowed to be.
BTW I thought my first comment was too harsh so I edited it. I'm sorry if it came off as mean.