enmussak

(2013-05-10 06:04:36)

gag me with a spoon

During this movie I found watching the inside of my eyelids much moreappealing. Something was just plain wrong about the whole movie. Thebiggest problem was that I didn't care about any of the characters butRipley. This film was made in between the use of actual puppets and goodcomputer animation (which is still obvious). That means that many times theAlien looked very fake. I thought the monster was more realistic in theoriginal Alien.Nothing was suspenseful of scary about this movie. The Alien point of viewruins the mystery and suspense of the Alien. I don't want to see what theAlien is seeing, what's the fun in that? I don't want to know where itsgoing, I just want to be surprised. Also, Ripley crashing on a planet of double Y chromosome rapists wasimmediately lame. Also, the doctor's little sob story made me wanna stopthe movie right there. This movie had all the elements of a cheezyblockbuster, an embarrassment to the series. Because of this film, I'llprobably never rent Alien: Resurrection. I can't even imagine thefar-fetched, pathetic way Ripley comes back. I heard that Jeunet directedthat film without knowing how to speak English to the cast. As theGodfather and Star Wars series' pointed out, three's a crowd. This is notan exception. 6/10

(2013-05-10 02:39:11)

Alien 3:Special Edition

It is no secret that the Twentieth Century Fox corporationtook David Fincher debut film and cut it severely intoan unfinished package. As rep said, "they might revisitAlien3 in the future". Well we should convince them torelease a special edition containing all the deleted scenesreinserted into the film again with assistance by Mr. Fincherhimself. The result: The film the public should haveseen on the day of it's release. As a fellow alien fanand Fincher admirer, I beg you and deplore you to write or contactTwentiethCentury Fox film and persuade them torelease a special edition of Alien 3 to the public.Only we can make them realize that a demand for the filmexists.Thank you and good day.-Krishna Manohar

Šimon Mudrák

(2013-04-30 06:43:54)

Simply a great ALIEN movie!

!Warning! This comment will contain spoilers!When I first saw ALIEN 3, I was maybe 13 or 14 years old. I thought itwas really a great movie, so later, when I read some reviews, I wassurprised how almost everybody hated it! I really liked the idea ofsetting the story of this movie on a prison planet. The previous filmswere all dark and scary, but this one also added the depressing elementof a rotten, lice infested, dirty prison. Plus the whole religion thinggave a great mystical feeling to the Alien creature. The acting is alsovery good, and I didn't even mind that Newt and Hicks died right at thebeginning of the movie (not that I have something against them).Sigourney Weaver's performance is impressive, just like in the previousfilms, and the other actors do a really good job too, especially thecharacter of Dillon. The final part of the movie, when the remainingprisoners try to capture the monster in the lead works, is simplybrilliant. The scenes done from the look of the Alien are great andthey give the chase a claustrophobic feeling, so the thin corridorslook even smaller, and you get the impression that the characters can'tescape from the Alien. The ending is, in my opinion, the best in thewhole series. Ripley sacrificing her self even brought a tear to myeye, because I am a long time fan of the series, I love the characterof Ripley, and seeing her sacrifice her self to save man kind was atouching moment. In the end, when they close the prison Fury 161, yourealize, that over the movie, you have grown to like the place. And bythe way, I think that ALIEN 3 has the best musical soundtrack in thewhole series. However, the movie is not perfect. Aside from some of theplot flaws (but the flaws in the plot don't keep you from enjoying thefilm), probably the weakest point of this movie are the specialeffects. I'm not talking about the shots were the Alien suit appears,Alec Gillis and Tom Woodruff did an amazing job designing and buildingthe Alien and it really looks alive. I'm talking about the shots werewe can see the computer generated Alien. The CGI version of thecreature looks fake.But this is just a minor flaw in a great movie suchas this one. So all I can say is, that this film is in NOT a bad film.It is great and I just don't understand all the negative comments thatit is receiving. I can only recommend it!

jclpblade

(2013-04-29 14:45:28)

for this film, they should have never made alien resurrection...

...let me explain, despite what appears to be a lowish score for thisfilm, i love it. But anything over 7/10 is a classic film in my view isone brinking upon immortality from age of cinema/TV etc (eg: aliens,terminator, etc.)A brief overviewalien 3 is a great movie. Many people slag it off, and i'm not surewhy. Had it not been for fox wanting to resurrect the series in theform of jean-Pierre Jeunet's 1997 addition, (i do not count the Avpmovies as additions as they are a completely different concept) itwould have been a great conclusion. It is extremely gritty, and it is easy to see why when you see thatthis film's cast is mainly British actors. British actors for somereason manage to do the whole 'gritty-horror' film thing very well.Also this film's setting is very dirty and dingy.The alien itself, as all alien director's have done is a unique design(with the possible exception of the new AsVP design, which goes back tothe design from aliens, in my opinion the best alien film but not thebest design). The first (Alien) introduced us. The second (Aliens) isless a drooling creature, and appears more rigid. The fourth (AlienResurrection) were brown, and had fins on the end of their tails toallow fluid swimming for an underwater scene. But the third's is very,very fast. It is truly a terrifying incarnation of the xenomorph,possibly the best since the original. It is extremely menacing, andspawned one of the greatest concepts for fans of alien, the predalien.This is the first film that mentions the concept of an alien gettingtraits from it's host.But the most important thing about this film is the ending. It managesto pull off an emotional ending in her sacrifice, despite the wholeseries being about pure terror and horror. I really do love the ending.Ripley's sacrifice to 'kill' the alien (just to have her efforts ruinedby Brad Dourif, J.E Freeman and others). Forget the ending to Titanic,or even End of Evangelion (for those not aware of what it is, if youknew you would understand, even if it is interpreted different tomine). Unfortunately the truly fabulous ending is ruined just by thecreation of alien resurrection. It shouldn't have been ruined, even ifresurrection isn't that bad in my opinion.This is a very good film, even though at times it does manage to alittle hollow. However, that's not what the genre/series/film sets outto be.

Michael Bregman

(2013-04-20 08:01:27)

Why? No! EEK!

I hated this movie. It was ok as A movie, but not as a part of the series.It just seemed wrong. I won't spoil it to anyone, but it really ruined theprevious movie "Aliens".We are back to one Alien, which is quite annoying after we were "Spoiled"with hundreds of aliens in "Aliens"... The movie just feels cold andwrong... I dunno. It does have some nice moment though.

gograyfirego

(2013-04-19 19:15:28)

For better or worse.

Though this movie is not necessarily like the first two Alien movies,it stands alone as a great movie that is based on a familiar story.When I first saw it, I must admit that I expected an action-packed ridesimilar to what James Cameron gave us. But that movie was verydifferent from Ridley Scott's view in the first movie. So, I tried tokeep an open mind.David Fincher's take on the story is a grotesque view of just how badLt. Ripley's luck can get. And thanks to some terrific performances bymany of the cast, Alien3 is (just like the first movie) a veryentertaining Sci-Fi thriller.I agree with many, here, that the Special Edition is an improvementover the theatrical version. However, I also believe that both versionstell the story with great flare. Perhaps a lot of my view comes frombeing a serious fan of David Fincher's work since this movie. So,perhaps I am biased but I will maintain my opinion, nevertheless.

Joseph Riesenbeck

(2013-04-16 09:17:14)

Fincher singlehandedly destroys what could have been a great series

It is very rare that I rate a movie as low as I rate Aliens3 (one star outof ten). There are lots of bad sequels in the history of film making, sothat in itself is not unusual. Yet it wasn't enough for David Fincher tomake a mound of garbage such as this, in the process he felt it necessary tocompletely obliterate the Alien movies by totally disregarding everythingthat had come before his film. I'm not saying he had to make the same kindof movie as the previous two films, but to kill two main characters in thefirst five minutes of a sequel, two characters that we had invested so muchtime in in Aliens, and to do it without blinking an eye is not onlyinexcusable, but makes Alien 3 so downbeat from the start, it's hard to careone iota about what comes afterward. The closest thing I can compare it towould be if George Lucas had killed Princess Leia And Han Solo in theopening scroll of The Empire Strikes Back. As if all this wasn't bad enough, there is not one character in this moviethat we care about or gives us any reason to care about them. They are justthere to supply food fodder for the Aliens when they decide to pop out andmove the plot along. Then again, we see so little of any of the charactersas Fincher decided not only to make a "dark film" but to film it in the darkas well. I guess this is what one calls atmosphere. I call it covering upyour big boo boo.Poor Sigourney Weaver. She does try. Yet we know so far in advance what isgoing to happen to Ripley, that we are not shocked or saddened by it. Weonly know that after the hell she went through in the first two films, shesure deserved a lot better than this mess.When you singlehandedly destroy a great series, you get a one rating, andyou get that one because I can't give you a zero. Next ClassPlease.

Johan Leupen

(2013-04-15 20:24:42)

A terrible misfire.

Agreed, it was just about the hardest thing in the world to follow-up afterAlien and Aliens but did it have to be this bad? Instead of expanding on thepremise, all Fincher does is go back to just one Alien-threat. And all thatever happens is some running around in corridors and some shrieking music,which makes for a poor attempt to achieve the same atmosphere as in Alien.Fincher also tries to rob us of any future alien-installments in the climaxbut luckily they went ahead and did it anyway with Alien:Resurrection.

xredgarnetx

(2013-04-08 05:47:24)

Waste

What a waste of time and talent is ALIEN 3. Ripley wakes up to findherself on a prison planet. Newt is dead and it is many years later.The prison planet is dark and drab and stark, and so are thecharacters. For those ALIENS fans hoping for an extension of JamesCameron's masterpiece of a sequel, what a huge disappointment ALIEN 3turned out to be. Death and despair is at every turn, and there islittle action to compensate for the gloom that pervades the storyline.Susan "Sigourney" Weaver is absolutely wasted as Ripley. If she were amore discerning actress, perhaps she would have turned down a third goat the role. If the movie itself had been better, perhaps the serieswould have wound up a memorable trilogy. Instead, this turkey led to aneven bigger turkey, ALIEN: RESURRECTION. Neither original directorRenny Harlin nor his replacement David Fincher should have been allowedwithin 500 miles of this project. It needed a sure hand like Cameron's.Believe me when I tell you, you may safely skip this one and the onethat follows. For that matter, the fifth movie in the series, AvP,isn't much of an improvement, but in its own odd way is slightly morewatchable than ALIEN 3 and ALIEN: RESURRECTION. I agree with those fanswho felt the series should have ended with ALIENS.

Hans Bezemer

(2013-04-07 16:29:48)

What was David Fincher thinking???

My first reaction was "What was this guy thinking??". I didn't reallyknow David Fincher back then. I only knew that he had done video clipsand commercials before. After seeing Alien 3 I thought: "Well, that'sit: back to the cereals." Fortunately, I wasn't one of the big bosses,because he had made some VERY good movies since.I know he wanted to do something different, so that's why he killed offall the characters of the predecessor in the first five minutes. Well,that was his first mistake. People LOVED those characters. They werepart of the previous movie and we had lived and - almost - died withthem. We didn't want to see them DIE and certainly not that early inthe movie for some ridiculous reason and in such an undignified way!Second, Sig Weaver is sexy. Taking off her hair doesn't give youcredits. Third, a bunch of crazy inmates doesn't give you too much toidentify with. And finally, after all the mayhem of the excellentAliens you don't want to reduce the field of play to one single alien.We've had that one and you have to be very, very good to pull that oneoff. David Fincher wasn't.In short, even the marginal Alien 4 is far, far better than this one.Maybe David Fincher was just the wrong man for this job. He's neverdone a sci-fi flick since - just some GREAT thrillers. If they'd giventhe job to James Cameron again, he would probably have had hell onearth, where an alien finally makes it to earth (didn't the corporationwant one for ages?) and ravages the population there.THAT would have been the logical next step and could have made a greatmovie - if only James Cameron had done the sequel. He didn't and wewill have to live to that for the rest of our lives.The Alien franchise never recovered from this misstep. A shame, becauseit started so well. Although I'm a real film collector, I never addedAlien 3 to my collection. I'm this sure I NEVER, EVER want to see thatmiserable, sorry heap of wasted frames again.

johnnyboyz

(2013-04-06 14:43:06)

Better than people give it credit for even if it strays a little too much toward the original.

I suppose with the benefit of hindsight, I can see exactly whatdirector David Fincher was trying here. We all know him for hisSe7en's, Fight Club's and his Zodiac's but this really does work as anearly piece of bleak cinematography and eerie suspense from the man.There is a lot of hate for Alien³, partly because it resembles thefirst Alien so much and probably partly also because it does notresemble the second Alien film enough. But to dislike it due to itslack of covering new ground is more of a compliment to Alien and itsoriginal, brilliant approach than it is a criticism of Alien³ becausewhilst this isn't better than '1', it is better than '2'.I did not enjoy Cameron's fast, action packed shoot 'em up attempt atan Alien film the first time I saw it and with subsequent viewings, itslips even further down the ladder of quality. There was just no heartand no attempt at trying to scare us – it was merely a bunch ofuninteresting, annoying marines shooting monsters. But Alien³ tonesthings down; it calms the viewer and allows us dialogue to listen to;situations to arrive and be dealt with whilst allowing certaincharacters to die either tragically or unexpectedly. In Aliens, therewould be a gunfight; a death and some silly one-liners afterwards –this would be repeated for the film's duration. Alien³ does not allowus dumb action rightly so until the film's finale and even then, theaction is not dumbed down; it is a sequence where the prisoners mustuse their logic in trapping the beast so that they may succeed – theidea to ban all guns from the film is a bold and brilliant one and onethat is said so early on in the office as a sort of way that allowsFincher to announce his ideas: "this will not be like the previousfilm: there are no guns on this particular planet." But then again, Fincher cannot direct action too well anyway. Hissubsequent films include little to no action but they get across afeeling that you have just seen something rather stunning anyway. Thefinale in Se7en is not an action set piece but a twist that makes youfeel you've just seen something incredible; the twist in Fight Clubhits you in a way that again forces you to come to terms with therevelation whilst making you feel you've just seen an amazing actionset piece. But Alien³ is a Fincher film that has a few death scenessprinkled in it throughout without ever feeling like it will suffice asguilty entertainment - Fincher knows suspense and gets the balanceright. There are some scenes early on involving a suspicion Ripley(Weaver) has; the subsequent autopsy and nearer the end when nobodyknows where the Alien is in the tunnels. To me, these scenes sufficeand act as more entertaining and more interesting viewing than out andout gunfire action.With this in mind, whenever death scenes do occur they do so in asudden and disorientating manner which is a neat idea for a film to dobut when it is handled by someone like Fincher who is more of asuspense director, it can fall flat. Consequently, a scene in which acouple of explosions go off for some reasons and people go flying allover the place, it seems a little heavy handled and sloppy, but it onlyever happens once until the finale which like I said is more logic andcamera than one-liners and gunfire. Directors such as Spielberg inJaws, Saving Private Ryan and Munich as well as Scott in the firstAlien can get the balance right between suspense and action and here,Fincher gives it a good go.There is also that reoccurring idea to do with gender and sexuality.Ripley and the last few members of the crew from Aliens have crashedonto a planet inhabited by male prisoners. There is a scene whichchallenges what these prisoners want, sexually, with how much they wantit. The lead warden (rather foolishly?) announces a woman is in theestablishment but the woman is Ripley who of course embodies verymasculine traits; this is further emphasised when she shaves her head,shedding any femininity that remains – this challenges the maleprisoners, some of whom have been established as rapists: do they stillwant the woman if the woman is not 'like' a woman? These ideas also payreference to the character of Vasquez in the previous Alien film.There may be the notion that Alien³ is very much like Alien what withits idea behind there only being one beast to contend with and a crewin an confined space without any weapons. There is also a hard bodied,strongly willed black character who is clearly (in a positive ethnicrepresentation) the only one who wants to fight, echoing the characterof Parker in Alien. But the film is not bad; the sets andcinematography are good and whilst the deaths, action and thesurprising amount of British prisoners is iffy, Clemens' relationshipwith Ripley acts as a sweet distraction and the film does its joboverall. The only thing that had me truly puzzled was why we saw theworld from the Alien's POV in this film – I do not recall that havingbeen done previously and cannot work out the theory (if any) behindthis.

mnpollio

(2013-04-05 22:35:38)

An abomination of near-epic proportions

One would love to have heard the story planning sessions for thisabysmal third film that pretty much put the final nail in the seriescoffin before a lackluster attempt to revive it with another ill-fatedfourth film. Ridley Scott's original was a simple And Then There WereNone haunted house feature set in outer space, but filled withjaw-dropping class and style that made it stand out from the pack of anumber of worthless imitators. James Cameron's sequel was a virtualtext book on how a sequel should be made in that it upped the ante bothaction-wise and emotionally by expanding the Sigourney Weavercharacter, getting the audience firmly on her side and giving her acompelling relationship with a daughter figure. If the first film wasan homage to a haunted house film, then the sequel is a rip-roaringhomage to war films.By contrast, it is difficult to figure what the goal of David Fincher'satrocious sequel is aiming for. It does not up the ante action-wise nordoes it expand the characters from the prior films. In fact, Fincher'saudience-hating mess offs two of the major characters from the priorfilm in the opening moments and sidelines another - apparently becauseof lack of imagination. We then discover relatively early in theproceedings that the leading lady is living on borrowed time, which allbut eliminates any rooting interest in the film. While creativelyFincher has license to eliminate audience favorites from the priorfilms, he cannot jettison them with so little respect and then notreplace them with characters at least as interesting without it seeminglike a slap in the face, but that is exactly what he does. The denizensof the prison asteroid where the doomed heroine and her ill-fated crewcrash in the opening moments is populated by an interchangeable melangeof nobodies who blur together.The storyline, such as it is, conspires a dubious and illogicalscenario of how an alien could have accompanied our heroine and thenpropagated itself on the asteroid. Rather than an army of aliens (a laCameron), Fincher ratchets it back so far that we instead get onemodest-sized alien that is far less intriguing or frightening than theone found in Ridley Scott's original. Action-wise we get badlydirected, murky-looking scenes of frantic bald men running downhallways. The alien moves at the speed of sound (almost like a BennyHill sped-up sketch) so that it would be impossible to elude it, yet anumber of characters illogically seem able to outrun it.Fincher makes it clear from the start that he is far less interested inaction or character development, but merely wishes to hang his ownbizarre stabs at style onto an unwieldy framework - and stylisticallyhe is no Ridley Scott or even a James Cameron. Why Weaver, who no doubtcould have negotiated for a better story, would have returned andparticipated in this pap is indefensible. Even worse, why 20th CenturyFox did not just end a promising sci-fi saga on a brilliant note andinstead chose to have it interred and vivisected by hacks is equallyunknowable. As it is, we have the perfect example of Class 101 on howNOT to make a sequel in a successful franchise.

Lance

(2013-04-04 14:32:44)

The most underrated film in the franchise. ***** out of 5

I have been a fan of this film since it's release in '92. I'm totallyaware of the conflict between the director and the studio and all ofthe various different stories to do with this film. Not too many filmswith that kind of history can turn out quite like this one. Somehow avery good entry in the series was born amongst all of the stuff thatwas going on. All of the acting is excellent. Elliot Goldenthal scoredone of my favorite film scores ever. Weaver looks like a real bad asswith a shaved head. And the Dog Alien is the scariest creature in anyof the 'Alien' films. You see, this one can run on all fours. Theatmosphere here is very industrial and bleak. Personally, I'm not toosure why it has gained all of the critical lambasting it has, but Ithink it was a perfect way to end the Alien Trilogy. Of course AlienResurrection come around and continued the story of Ellen Ripley... butthat's another story.The DVD version contains a different cut of the film, which is quiteinteresting. I especially liked how some of the characters were given alot more screen time but some of these scenes have to be played withsubtitles because they never went through the dubbing stage ofproduction and it can be hard to hear the characters speak over loudbackground noises. You would have thought somehow they could have beendubbed over for the DVD release. Still, they're good to see. I thoughtthe alternate alien birth was quite neat. The special effects in thissequence were great. However, if the alien was born from an ox, I thinkit would have been best had they put horns on the alien. Still thisalternate scene isn't as dramatic as the theatrical version. Ipersonally prefer the dog birth scene since it's a lot harder to watchbecause you can tell that the poor dog is in a lot of pain. Perhaps themost disappointing moment in the alternate cut is the ending. The queenalien no longer pops out of Ripley's chest. There are major cuts here,and the music shifts gears, sounding obviously tampered with. Overallthough, this version is an interesting alternative but I still preferthe theatrical version.I highly recommend this film regardless of what the director and allthe nay-sayers say. It's good stuff.

Pledge

(2013-04-04 09:29:18)

Worthy successor to an excellent series...

This is a very underrated film. A first time debut by David Fincher. Forsomereason, people love to hate the film, or haven't seen it but assume it'snogood becasue of comments they've heard from others. I loved it from thebeginning. Fincher manages to make an art of displaying disturbing imagesonthe screen. And I do mean art. Some of his camera pans and angles are tobesavored.I think many wanted to see another Cameron adaptation. More aliens, biggerguns and big explosions. This film finished the Alien trilogy in style. Itrefused to become the hollywood shoot 'em up that was the logicalextensionof Aliens. It instead focused on the original premise. In a few shortwords'Aliens are bad, but not necessarily as bad as humans'.The atmosphere is one of hopelessness. We see Ripley as weary as sheshouldbe after so long a journey frought with so much misery. At 'the ass end ofspace' she finds spirits as worn as her own. Likely the reason a penalcolony was chosen as the setting. Fincher has to be commended to have thecourage to bring such a stark dreary vision to realization. And, to killoffsuch a strong and popular character (at least that's what I thought at thetime).This movie is an excellent third installment. Standing alongside the firsttwo as an equal. With yet another talented director taking the reins andadapting to his own vision.As a final testament, there I was, having seen the first two over and overagain, literally sitting on the edge of my seat during the Alien baitingsequence. There was some serious suspense generated there. Who would havethought that could happen after seeing dozens of Aliens running around inthe second film and only having one tinier one in this!Give it a try, and appreciate it for the different, yet true, take on theAlien experience it is.

Max_cinefilo89

(2013-03-13 16:29:37)

Flawed but underrated third installment in the Alien saga

Following the success of Alien, any sequel had a LOT to live up to.With Aliens, James Cameron's second installment in the franchise, beingevery bit as flawless as Ridley Scott's original creature feature, tosay David Fincher, the director of Alien 3, was under a great deal ofpressure is probably an understatement. In fact, continuousinterference from the studio made the first-timer so nervous andfrustrated he eventually left during post-production, refused to makeany kind of contribution to the Alien Quadrilogy DVD set (where hisdirectorial debut was shown in two versions, the theatrical cut and theso called Assembly Cut, which was meant to be closer to Fincher'svision) and even turned down Mission: Impossible III because he claimedto have "already f*cked up one movie with a "3" in the title". Hisfeelings may be justified, but as flawed as it may be (and it is incertain parts), Alien 3 is actually a quite respectable picture.Just like Cameron did in 1986, Fincher decides to sever all ties withthe previous film by having Hicks (Michael Biehn) and Newt (CarrieHenn), the only two people, besides Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), whosurvived the attack of the Alien queen, die during the opening credits(an effective intro, but it does sort of make the conclusion of Alienspointless), thus leaving the series' heroine all by herself when shereaches a bizarre planet known as Fiorina 161. Here the Weyland-Butanicompany, the same that financed the missions in the first two films,has had a maximum security prison built to keep dangerous criminalsunder surveillance. At first, Ripley's only problem is getting alongwith these people, who are mostly religious fanatics. Later, when a fewmysterious deaths occur, she realizes she didn't reach Fiorina 161alone, and the nightmare that has haunted her for years is far fromover.For a first-time director, Fincher shows a confidence which is rarewhen tackling projects this huge: while he can't be compared to Scottor Cameron, he has managed to take the claustrophobia that permeatedthe first Alien and enhance it, making Alien 3 exactly as chilling asits predecessors and successfully anticipating his later work(especially Se7en and Panic Room). Also skillful is Weaver who, havingalready played the character twice, knows what can be done with Ripleyand takes her to new levels, both physical (she has no hair for most ofthe film) and emotional (her "relationship" with the aliens). Sadly,none of the other characters are as appealing, despite some of thembeing played by quite talented people (Pete Postlethwaite and CharlesS. Dutton among them). The only possible exception is Lance Henriksen"returning" as Bishop, only his appearance is too brief and too lateinto the movie to really make a difference. The real problem of thisfilm, however, is the alien itself: what was a menacing presence in thehands of Scott and Cameron is reduced to an ugly example of early CGI,which actually looks WORSE as the movie progresses. While it is kept inthe shadows, it can get away with its awfulness; once exposed, though,it is almost too pitiful to watch.Overall, this is neither the masterpiece some had expected nor thetotal trash Fincher erroneously thinks he made. In fact, whateverdefects the film has, he completely redeems himself with the climax,one of the bleakest, most audacious in cinema history (another Finchertrademark), so brilliant it will make one wish Fox had never eventhought of an Alien 4. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. But thatshould not affect the viewers' feelings towards number 3: on its own,it is a pretty damn good sci-fi flick.

gibbi8

(2013-03-13 08:13:28)

Unfairly judged.

Alien 3 was given the unfortunate situation of preceding twoground-braking films. The first redefined what we'd come to expect fromthe horror genre and the second did the same with the action genre. Thethird had high expectations and ultimately failed to meet them. That isnot to say its a bad movie though.Alien 3 assembles just as strong of a cast as the first two. With agood mix of both American and British talent. The British actorsoutshine the American ones, with only Charles S. Dutton really stickingout amongst the American bunch. The Alien now resembles a four leggedanimal, but unfortunately loses a lot of its scare by being computergenerated a lot of the time. In my opinion that is the largest fault ofthe movie. The movie is saved by the strong cast and theirrelationships with each other. Some don't get much screen time or muchof a character but the ones who stick around till the end are the mostinteresting anyway. There are some powerful scenes in this movie whichstick with you and its thanks to the excellent cast. You'd be best offgetting the Special addition of this movie as it fleshes out a few moreof the characters and clears a few others things. You'll still do wellseeing the regular cut though.Artistically the movie is more impressive than the previous two. Thanksmust go to Fincher and his dark style of atmosphere and storytelling.Why he dismisses this film is beyond me, not his best film but nothingto be ashamed of. All film makers have their ups and downs and this isdefinitely one of Finchers downs but because of the sheer quality ofhis other films it shouldn't be seen as bad in any way.Its safe to say this movie might not be for everyone. Its dark, violentand a much different beast from what we saw in "Aliens". But payattention to whats on screen and you may think differently than most.8/10

Ainjel

(2013-03-03 14:22:13)

A Deep, Meaningful Tale of Personal Tragedy and Horror

Alien 3 is a wonderfully unique and gothic addition to the Alien Saga.The ambience penetrates everything, and lasts till the end. People whodon't see this film for the message it delivers, probably will complainthatthis film is too gruesome, sombre, or whatever. However, it has anunderlying ethical meaning, and is rich in symbolism, which is for you todiscover.The third installment of this thread reinstates the terror of the firstmovie, but delivers it in an altogether original manner. This is no actionflick, it is a movie with its own genre - a genre that was nearly lost inthe action of the second film. Once again, the alien has become aterrifying and sexual predator. Ripley's character is fleshed out, evenmore, and we truly feel her Christ-like sacrifice. True Aliens fans willlove this, but those that came only because of the guns and claws in thefirst sequel, won't appreciate the true depth of this beautiful film. Itismy wish that, one day, they will release the director's cut of this film,soit can be seen in its entirety.

Zhark

(2013-03-03 04:20:02)

Artistic approach and an awesome finale of a brilliant trilogy

I'm going to be quick here:Alien = Scott and Giger's typical horror flick buried in fifteen tons ofbrilliant art and design. Graphically astounding, but plot-wise it leavesalot to be desired. In the year of 1999 the cast looks unbelievablyseventies, and the movie is utterly un-rewatchable (if you can say such athing), as the initial scares are long gone. Awesome movie because its sographically perverse. The whole alien-popping-out-of-chest thing wasunwatchable, kudos to John Hurt for that. Fabulous movie in itstime.Aliens = All-out americanised highly enjoyable action flick, taking theusual american sequel-recipe (make it bigger and louder) to new heights.Adds a new alien design and the whole hive-structure thing to the aliens.The queen looks bloody retarded, a caricature of Giger's original aliendesigns.The reason this movie seems to be the number one of the trilogy is simplybecause its so incredibly easy to understand. The soundtrack is simple,theplot is simple (actually), the characters are fantastically simple (andtherefore easily likeable) and they packed in a lil annoying kid too(although it added a good touch to the plot) that does nothing but getintotrouble and gets saved a lot. Bleargh.A cliched simple action movie sporting fat designs and a dark, broodingindustrial-type sci-fi atmosphere, but still graphically nothing comparedtothe first movie.Alien3 = This is pure depression, despair, anger, realism. It takes thewhole "we can take them on" feeling you got after a while in Aliens andslams it through the pavement. Without our big guns and fancy technologyushumans are really nothing but a bunch of treacherous gits. Apart from thefirst obvious plot hole (the alien egg), which was absolutely necessaryanyway if there was going to be a second sequel, the plot stands out asthecleanest of the lot. Its deeper, more terrifying than Alien, andinfinitelymore sophisticated than Aliens. We see the new dog alien (cleaning up thequestion wether aliens take on their hosts physique) and we see how darkandterrible the world of Alien really is. The imagery is fantastic, sometimesalmost like a painting, mostly browns and reds and fabulous camera angles.The scene where the candles along the ground get blown out is likeicecubesdown my spine, and the first glimpse of the alien is awe-inspiring. Thereligious theme, the past evil of the prisoners, theonly-female-on-a-male-dominated-planetbit, the i'm-gonna-die-soon-anyway bit, thewe-dont-give-a-damn-about-you-if-you-dont-help-usbit... Ahh this movie is fabulous. Alien resurrection is disowned from theseries in my eyes, it shows too much. This movie is awesome, it shows justenough. "Alien" = Stranger, new, different, unknown. Aliens managed tohidethe aliens well enough, and alien3 finishes off perfectly. David Fincherisa sheer visual genius.This is a 100% good movie. Actings good, effects are brill, and on thesubject of "we dont like the characters" i have this to say: Thats thepoint. Youre not really supposed to like ANYONE exept from ripley. They'reall filthy b*****ds.

dondanhernandez

(2013-02-12 02:55:46)

Not as bad as one would think.

Both the original cut and the AC versions of this film aren't ashorrible as people would like to think. Yes there is one major plothole (how the hell did that egg end up there and how did it impregnatethe dog/ox) However the movie itself plot hole aside wasn't half bad,the characters were all really good, Ripley's character development wasgreat and her personality was much darker, and with good reason,everything she loved was lost because of the damn aliens. Though all ofthe characters are y chromo rapists, and murderers doesn't mean youcan't care about them, especially Dutton's character, that moment whenhe decides to stay and hold the alien at bay to protect Ripley was justwell played and added to the drama and loss of this character whoearlier stated he was 'a murderer and rapist of women' and is nowsacrificing himself to keep one alive.However there are some gaping problems in this movie that I won't coverbecause, well everyone knows what those problems are (no not the deathof Hicks and Newt it wasn't that bad they died) But the films directorshould not be the one held responsible for allegedly ruining thefranchise (something I think resurrection did) they threw him onto thefilm and began having them shoot it without a script. EverythingFincher wanted was tossed aside by Fox, hence the reason the guydespises this film and won't do any commentary or interviews based onthe movie.

JSHARK111

(2013-02-11 07:04:49)

The most underated 3rd installment of all time

I am sick and tired of hearing all these complaints that this movie wasabsolutely horrible. I saw this movie for the first time last weekend andIhad already heard all the negative comments on the movie about it losingtwoof the characters from Aliens and it has a bad ending. Well I saw it and Iwas completely blown away! David Ficher's directing was brilliant, ElliotGoldenthal's score was magnificent, the acting was great and had probablysome of the best scenes in the whole series. I understand that the fansmight have been annoyed by the abscence of the two characters from the 2ndinstallment, but please, that's what distracted them from enjoying thismovie. This movie doesn't deserve a 6.0, it deserves at least a seven. Theending on the contrary was the perfect way to end the series. I just wanttoforget that Alien Ressurection ever existed.