Alien³ (1992)

I am one of the people who doesn't dislike this film because it is different, but because it wasn't different enough. Oh no, there is an alien behind you. Look out, it is picking you off one by one. I really didn't think it even tried to do something else. I would've preferred Alien 4 to this one if that one wasn't campy. However, if you liked the first Alien the best out of all the movies, you will probably enjoy this film more than I did. I just kinda enjoyed the combat of Aliens more than the thriller movies. However, Alien was one of the first to do this, so it is a testament to the timelessness of it's concept which we younger viewers take for granted.

Fmovies: Alien 3 was a letdown of a sort when compared to both Alien and Aliens, classics in their own right. Sigourney Weaver returns as does Lance Hendriksen in two different roles. But even though Weaver is there, the movie just doesn't have the same power as the first two films.

Ripley (Weaver) crash lands on a prison planet and is taken in by a doctor (Charles Dance). But the Alien has followed her again in a different way, and goes about destroying the inhabitants of the planet. Once again its up to Ripley to destroy the monster.

The acting in this film was pretty good, and the visuals are amazing, but this movie, as directed by David Fincher, is way too dark and depressing when compared to the first and second films. This film leaves us with no real hope for anyone. Yes there are some genuine scares to be found here, and like I said the film has a good look to go with quality acting. Too bad that the director took it down this despairing road with a horrible ending that I never could accept.

When compared to the first two movies, this film is second rate. However, it is still much better than Alien Resurrection which followed. That movie, to me, was a waste of time and money.

I'm hardly the first to mention it, but it should be known by any potential viewer; the title being just is not in any way, shape or form as threatening herein as in the first two(which right there takes a chunk of the appeal, and proceeds to burn it to cinders). There's also really no atmosphere, not one that could unnerve anyone but the most easily intimidated, anyway, which further eliminates reasons we watched the prior entries. So what *do* we have? Well, the Fincher touch(though it should be known that he disowned it, and clearly with good cause) is there, somewhat. We're treated to Giger doing more design work. The score certainly isn't bad. Some of the writing isn't awful(and, not unlike the other sequels, it didn't exactly have a great start-off point, so let's give it at least a little slack... but let's keep to the pocket-knife for the cutting of it for now), if there are lines that... really couldn't work no matter how well they had been delivered. Anyway, I was on the positives of this; Ripley is still consistent, and Henriksen is back(if his performance is... shall we say "overplayed", to put it nicely). Some of the effects are the best yet of the series(others... not so much). The plot isn't all that interesting(oh dear, we're back at the criticisms), if it does have an idea or two that give the whole thing some merit(as well as characters and back-stories fit for something done by David). The Special Edition/Assembled Cut(not Director's Cut) adds scenes, some of which of lesser technical quality(but hardly a major bother, if one is up for watching more), which I would suggest for anyone who want to give this another chance(I enjoyed some of the new it brought about). In the end, I'm afraid I just find it more and more difficult and unsatisfying to actually sit down for the one hour and forty five minutes that this lasts before the ending credits start on their usual, anticipated roll(they really ought to jump, maybe do a little dance(...get down tonight), you know, mix it up a little) with each viewing. I recommend this to those who want to watch every movie in this series, and/or all of David Fincher's films. 5/10

Alien³ fmovies. For me a good sequel needs to have new things, and it should not be a rehash of it's prequel. That's the problem with Alien3. Alien was a great movie, the Alien is one of the coolest movie monsters ever created (together with Predator). Aliens improved on this by adding a lot of new cool things, most noticeable the Alien Queen. Alien3 doesn't add anything new. Well, there is the queen parasite, and the new alien is a "dog Alien" (makes you wonder what the Alien from the space jocks (Alien 1) looks like...), but these are so insignificantly. So we're stuck with a been-there-done-that monster-chasing-victims movie. Still the movie is fun, and it looks absolutely awesome (great atmosphere). Not the crappy movie you might expect, but not a worthy addition to the Alien series too. Go see parts 1,2 and 4 !

I would like to begin by pointing out the most glaring error of this movie--the Queen Alien simply could not have brought eggs on board. I have watched both Aliens and Alien 3 enough to know. Either she laid them (which could not have happened since we saw her after she exited the drop-ship, and she probably needed her reproductive apparatus), or she carried them on board (another impossibility, she wasn't holding them, and even if she was and simply tossed them out while the camera wasn't looking, why would the blasted face-huggers wait for the 30 min - 1 hr period it would take for Ripley to shower, change, fix Hicks up, clean poor Bishop up, and enter the cryo-tube before they {or it} jumped out to latch on. That is assuming they even found their way to a part of the ship close enough to the cryo-tubes.) Phew! I feel like Annie Wilkes from Misery when she railed about the chapter plays--that simply isn't what happened. As a friend of mine pointed out, 20th Century Fox needed to know then they didn't need Ripley to continue the series. The need to include (and bump off) the series' leading lady landed them in that difficult, albeit impossible storytelling position. Alien 3's previews hinted at a possible earth-battle, the epic Alien story we all imagine in the future, but it obviously failed to deliver. The special effects of the alien were sadly lacking in this film--the prequels succeeded far better. The feel of the movie is somewhat unusual, dreamlike, but not what I would call good or bad. I do believe the movie's attempt to provide modernism is a little over the top. My goodness, Alien and Aliens weren't "overly Romantic" because Ripley survived. Good Lord, virtually everyone died in each film! To the remainder of the character, Hicks, Newt, and unfortunately Ripley was truly a waste to me. It totally nullified the second film. It cheaply tried to mimic the first film by providing the suspense of a hopeless group stumbling in the dark against the perfect predator. All too familiar, right? The other films at least tried to add to the series with some new idea. I can't totally bash the move though. It does continue the tradition of providing colourful characters, although they all do perish. My overall thoughts--the movie, apart from the series, could stay afloat as a B class science fiction thriller.

But it fails miserably as an attempt to carry on the series called "The Alien Legacy." It attempts to be so much, but achieves so little... My suggestion--watch it and attempt to wade through the pretense. But watch the other three, too, because... We know Alien can do better!

Intrigue. In Alien, the characters don't know what they're getting into and the only reason the audience knows is because 1. The trailers, 2. the Title and 3. by now everyone knows the reputation of the film . . . and it was good. In Aliens the characters know the creature, and declare war neglecting to calculate the possible numbers they face . . . and it was good. In Alien 3 we get a prison. "But they're not prepared! That's the intrigue," you say to which I would answer, "If they were prepared there *couldn't* be a film. They'd take out the Alien in 10 minutes."

Alien 3 just cannot compete with its predecessors. The film is 'okay' and it's up against two of the most influential sci-fi horror films by Ridley Scott (the director with the slickest style) and James Cameran (one of the best action directors) scores composed by the legendary Goldsmith and Horner. . . Alien 3 has David Fincher and Elliot Goldenthal. Fincher is a good director, but outclassed by Scott & Cameran; Goldenthall has yet to impress me with one of his scores, and has yet to not annoy me with one of his "sequel" scores (Batman Forever & Batman & Robin come to mind).

The uninteresting premise of the film, the uninteresting setting, uninteresting characters, uninteresting story in the end just kill the film.

More effort seemed to go into shaving Weaver's head than making the script good. And, I'm sorry, but the handful of well crafted scenes where Ripley is emotionally torn, or faces a difficult decision--the whole 3 scenes in the film what have a valid 'deeper meaning' does not save the 90% of the film that is boring and stale.

Many people found the jump from Aliens to Alien 3, the return to one alien and the fate of the survivors from Aliens unforgivable. I'm somewhat torn--I don't mind such things happening if the new route is good. The route chosen for Alien 3 was mediocre, and so the break from its predecessors did come across more disappointing. Change is not always good; change for the sake of change is typically bad. Alien 3 is a good example of this.

In the end, all of the elements of the film are mediocre to good with the exception of the script which did not live up to standards. Hence, the film is overall just "okay." But after the caliber of its predecessors, Alien 3 really is a disappointment in terms of quality.