In the first season we see two men struggling over the case containing the antidote. One of these men is a Breen soldier, but who is the other? He is particulary Albino, even down to the dark glasses, and identical to his fellow men who lie dead. If these are Monicans then they're a special strain, and I doubt even Aeon would kill her own people in such a situation. Also, if they were Monicans they wouldn't need the antidote because the plague is specifically terrorizing Bregna.

-- Philip Mills (philip.mills@cableinet.co.uk), May 15, 1998

Answers

I don't have the video to hand, but did any of them even have guns?

-- Philip Mills (philip.mills@cableinet.co.uk), May 15, 1998.

Well, I have something small to contribute to this... In the character design sheets for first season that used to be on the expanse.com Aeon Flux homepage, there was an entire sheet for that guy, and he was designated simply as 'spy', by Chung himself. Maybe Chung deliberately wanted these people to be just another faceless international power. And of course, even if they were Monicans, it's been well proven that Aeon's never been exclusively aligned with the Monicans... then again, Chung hadn't intended on Aeon's completely independant position until third season, from what I understand, so who knows...

-- Mat Rebholz (mer5@dana.ucc.nau.edu), May 15, 1998.

I think Aeon is aligned with the Monicans in this season because if you notice at the end, once she is killed, the Monican Spy Base has control of her body (which they destroy), so it is doubtful that they would have contol (or even care about) her body and discovery if she was a lone mercenary

-- TGoochild (Wierd97@aol.com), May 17, 1998.

>> I think Aeon is aligned with the Monicans in this season because if >> you notice at the end [...]

Yes, but she would kill another Monican as easily as she would blink. The key here is situational ethics. If it benefits Aeon and what she considers to be right, she'll kill. Be it death, sex, or emotional manipulation- Aeon's conscience is guided by her internal compass, not an outside tome of morality or loyalty. Oh my.

-- Robert (rfbeck@deltanet.com), June 04, 1998.

I'm pretty sure they weren't monicans. All of the Monican men in all of the seasons (except maybe Onan) wear khaki pants, Aeon-type boots and a leather top which shows their nipples (finally a show that has the men wearing clothes just as provacative as the women's! :-) Also, allmost all monicans have black or dark brown hair (not that we see that many of them in the show)

-- Frostbite (foo@bar.com), June 04, 1998.

Here is my opinion....... Aeon works for Monica..... we know this because her mission was being watched by the Monican Military.

Now.....weather the black shirted guys she killed along with the Breen soldier were Monican.......well.......they were dressed like Monicans.....and their guns were EXACTLY the same as Aeon's (and all the Monican soldiers seen in "War").

Then the only question remaining is.......WHY did she kill them?

On what Monican troops look like.....yes, they are usually wearing khaki pants and the black/purple leather that Aeon wears. The best times we get to see Monica and the Monicans are in "Aeon Flux", "War", "Isthmus Crypticus", and "The Demiurge". And of course.....anytime we see Aeon. ;-)

-- Plutar Circavus (karl.wolf@unisys.com), January 13, 1999.

I see no reason why Monicans have to look any certain way. Breens have been shown to come in all sorts of packages. If that's the case for such a conforming society, surely an anarchic one could have as much variance?

-- Matthew Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), July 30, 2000.

Oh, and the big example: Scaphandra. She's a Monican I assume, and she certainly doesn't fit the stereotype.

-- Matthew Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), July 31, 2000.

Scaphandra is really free-lance I think. At the time we see her I believe she has been hired by Monica (maybe Aeon herself) the dialogue between Trevor, Aeon and S certainly gives the impression that she has an allegiance to Monica (double-agent etc...) but I get the feeling that she is more an individual.

I think that she is characteristic of most people. She lives for herself but is associated with a side due to her actions, and what that side stands for.

-- William (stateofflux@yahoo.com), August 01, 2000.

If Peter were here, he'd yell at us for being arbitrary again.

-- Frostbite (mbkrooks@bellsouth.net), August 01, 2000.

William: I agree, and you phrased it perfectly. Perhaps the Monicans are simply any non-Breens, from a Breen perspective. Frostbite: You're very right, and I was thinking that the entire time I was writing in this column, almost kicking myself. In real life, I think that people need to be judged more as individuals than as group members. I do think that this particular discussion does have somewhat of a point, though, if only to try to make people realize that not all members of a group need be clones of each other. I suppose in the earlier shorts, there was a certain degree of emphasis on the fact that they were being depicted as near-identical, however I think this was only for the purposes of driving home the theme of those particular episodes. As for focusing on arbitrary details: It is, I guess, a "guilty pleasure" of mine. I agree with Chung that other aspects of a story and character interaction are potentially much more interesting and important, but I look at speculation about the petty stuff as a sort of diversion to keep my mind happy in between the more serious conceptual explorations. Plus, I've always been an organizer by nature. :)

-- Matthew Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), August 01, 2000.

Yes Frostbite, I agree. When ever I enter into a dialogue about Aeon I keep in mind the comments of Peter. That people who go into too much detail really are losing the point (that being self-interpretation) I feel the current topic does not quite fit into that category, though I might be wrong.

-- William (stateofflux@yahoo.com), August 02, 2000.

I don't think it's necessary to slavishly follow Chung's advice. Being the creator, he has to focus on what makes a show "work", but our imaginations have a little more leeway. Besides, isn't the whole point to come up with our own interpretation, making up part of the story ourselves, as it were?

-- Paul (gilbreathfamily@worldnet.att.net), August 03, 2000.

I mean, interpretation in a general sense. If you want to argue that one should understand the basic points of an episode before picking it apart, fine by me, but the cul-de-sacs and "meaningless" stuff can be interesting too.

-- Paul (gilbreathfamily@worldnet.att.net), August 03, 2000.

It is always amazing to me the things everone else notices about Aeon flux, if it wasn't for these boards I'd never notice the clothing the Breens wore, I'm amazed at the diligence of the minds of others to this show. Personally, I always did focus on the love affair between Aeon and Trevor, but the stories confused me, all the info from the forum has enhanced the whole thing for me. Oh oh, does this mean I am agreeing with Paul, maybe I do have a guilty pleasure or two, heh heh.

-- Barbei (Suesuesbeo@aol.com), August 03, 2000.

I agree with that as well. Advice should'nt be blindly followed. But I think Peter is right in some way. I think he was warning of the obsession of detail. I think that it would be just as credible if anyone pointed out that fact (not just Peter) After saying all this, anything to do with the series would have to be very dull for me not take at least a passing interest.

-- William (stateofflux@yahoo.com), August 03, 2000.

To speak for myself, I've always been a man of aesthetics, and it is my first and original nature when relating to film, I admit. When I look at a film I notice first the audiovisual quality and direction style, and this can often be more alluring to me than the writing behind it. Being a fan of Aeon Flux has showed me more of the film world, namely the ideas of Chung that writing is in a way of prime importance. But also in line with his ideas, I believe that personal interpretation of film is very important, and so my approach to film is more aesthetic. I can appreciate the ideas of a film just as much as the rest of it, but my mind, being what it is, is drawn to the rest by default. I try to be well-rounded.

-- Matthew Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), August 03, 2000.