TED Talk page info
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) 20:40, March 3, 2012 (UTC)
- The movie itself isn't actually that inconsistent with AvP (as Peter Weyland can easily be made Charles Bishop's son), only the info from the website. And we don't even know how much of it actually comes from the creators of the movie and how much from the marketing department. 18.104.22.168 02:56, July 20, 2012 (UTC)
Weyland Corp vs. Weyland Industries
If you look at the usage on the weylandindustries.com website, it is fairly obvious that the names "Weyland Corp" and "Weyland Industries" are being used interchangeably. Divisions of a company are never used to refer to the parent entity. Additionally, there does not seem to be any references to any individually named subdivisions at all (including Weyland Dynamics, which I've yet to see mentioned ANYWYERE). If there was in-fact a seperate Weyland Corp founded by Peter that eventually was folded into Weyland Industries, there should be some sign of a divided history before they merged. Sure, there can be companies with similar names that are differentiated by their company type (Corp, LLC, etc...), but they are not listed on a single website with only one history between them (and their names are not used interchangeably).
So in summary, I need to see some sort of quote that shows there are two different entities indicated in the released lore and not just two names for the same company (and some sort of mention of this Weyland Dynamics). No more arguing semantics of definitions, produce some REAL proof on this (and the twins thing I posted about above) or I start editing again. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 21:24, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Charles Bishop Weyland?
Was AVP the film retconned? This clearly occurs at a point when Peter would be in his teens. I am pretty lost.
@User22.214.171.124: No it has not been retconed. Couple things u should know.
- 1):A head writer for Prometheus was asked about canon issues between the avp and Prometheus. His response was they were sticking with canon but also that the story comes first. Canon is lose in the alien predator universe, and all the movies but the avps and predators have taken MAJOR liberties with canon, to the point that if we got picky with events in the saga all the aliens would be noncanon with each other, besides the fact that Prometheus has things in it that contradict the movies that tale place after it inuniverse alien aliens ect...
- 2): In the new blu-ray Alien set it has a special feature called "Alien Saga." In this feature it says that the Saga lives on in home video, games, comics, and novels. Ergo they are all canon, they also went out of their way to show that toys, board games and ect are not in the saga.
- 3)Fox has a policy with canon and everyone will respect each-others works especially movies.--WAVE (talk) (Contribs) 22:41, June 12, 2012 (UTC)--WAVE (talk) (Contribs) 22:41, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Never mind WAVE, he's been saying those same three weak "facts" for a while. The events of the film clearly point to a retcon, or at the least a divergence. Ridley Scott was working off of a timeline devoid of the Predator franchise, most likely due to his distaste for the AvP films. I doubt there will never be more AvP material released, but it is apparent that Prometheus has no relation to any of it. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 23:18, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Changed your tune haven't you? In one of the blogs you were saying how they were all connected and were not retconned. EDIT: sorry, got you mixed up with another member. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 23:30, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
@User:126.96.36.199, don't pay listen too The14th, he is dramatically downplaying canon information, he is a canon breaker and a troll.
@Cruentus: You are mistaking TI154th for The14th. The14th is possibly a stalker and I have found it strange that his name is similar if not a parody of TI154th.--WAVE (talk) (Contribs) 23:37, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
I'm not a canon breaker, you're just in denial about this film's relation to the AvP franchise. All of your arguements relied on creative interpretations of various words, a random tweet, and a DVD extra that is inconsequential ("lives on" is not a firm confirmation of canon). The provided lore states in no uncertain terms that Peter Weyland is the founder of Weyland Industries in the timeline that Prometheus uses. That one fact makes it incompatible with anything other than the existing Alien films. This isn't complicated. The14th (talk) (Contribs) 05:33, June 13, 2012 (UTC)
- @The14th: Get over it the four mediums have been confirmed canon, my argument is not creative interpretations of various words. Your lack of respect for information in regards of what is and isn't canon makes you unreliable when it comes to any questions on what is and isn't canon.--WAVE (talk) (Contribs) 05:11, June 20, 2012 (UTC)
- @The14th: I don't need any other source stating what is and isn't canon. Your not going to weasel your way out of ignoring official material. I had a talk with a guy about the line you have a problem with, the one you say I used CREATIVE INTERPRETATIONS, yeah guess what you can take the exact sentence show it to a collage professor that teaches English and they will tell you the same thing I am telling you know. By saying that the SAGA lives on in home-video, comics, novels, games, that means they are in one saga and they are canon.
But since I really want to devastate your argument I will throw these at you DAVE!
- That’s exactly what we’re looking to do. 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.
"But since I really want to devastate your argument I will throw these at you DAVE!"
Who's Dave? And none of those really prove your point. The minor DVD extra saying the "saga" living on means that the characters and settings see new life in other mediums, but that does not mean that they are connected in a single canon. You could make the same statement about the Star Trek novels, games, and comic books, but those are all held as non-canon by Paramount. The comment from Gearbox really works against you, as he plainly says that FOX is "flexible" with canon (i.e. they are not quite concerned with these spin-off projects being cohesive). Not to mention the article is about "creating a canon", implying construction of an independent canon. Finally, that tweet you use is really just a shot at your own foot. It is another admission that they are free to retcon previous works in the interest of telling a story. So in summary you have a net negative one source in your favor, where as I have the entire Prometheus lore campaign to back me up. When are you finally going to surrender to the fact that Ridley Scott kicked AvP out of his timeline? The14th (talk) (Contribs) 04:27, June 22, 2012 (UTC)
Ultimatex my friend, it is speculation and simply assumption to consider Peter to be Mr. weyland from P:CJ, there is no sources or evidence to say it and the game predates the concepts and characters of Prometheus, Peter Weyland did not even exist as a character then. Predator: CJ seems to reference the Bishop character of the avp films (Lucretia mentions that Hunter Borgia was friends with Charles) so the Mr. Weyland has more connection to Charles than peter. If you find the current info to be unsuitable however, we can discuss a way to make it more neutral i.e "A Mr. Weyland makes an appearance in the game Predator: Concrete Jungle, but it is unknown if he is related or is connected to peter Weyland or charles Weyland." The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 21:05, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
- "Greetings everyone, I’m Mr. Weyland. I’ve prerecorded this message because my grave condition prevents me from speaking with you in person today.
- My health is so poor that I financed the Prometheus mission in hopes that by searching for answers to mankind’s existence, I can find a solution to my own mortality as well. I wish I could be there in person as you all reach the next and possible final major milestone in human evolution, but I must remained confined to cryogenic sleep due to having so little time left.
- However, I believe that this fruits of this journey will mend my broken body so that I may stand with you as we return to Earth with the answers to questions we have sought since the dawn of time. I wish you the best of luck as you take this next giant leap for mankind.
- And all though I’m certain what we discover will be treasured by the human race, I personally will reward you with anything else you could ever want should you find a way to return my life to me. Godspeed Prometheus."
- ―Hologram of Peter Weyland
This speech above that you have quoted on this page is not in the movie at all. It was taken from this review which was complaining that this is what Peter Weland should have said, instead of lying to everyone by telling them he was dead already (for no discernable reason). This crapfest of a movie has no right to seem cooler by association with the good writing above, and as such I've removed it.
188.8.131.52 04:30, January 19, 2013 (UTC)