Rating: 
Summary: A poor, unsatisfying chapter of a legendary saga.
Review: David Fincher was not meant to direct this movie. His obsession with death sunk to a new low and made "Alien 3" the least successful installment of the four-part series. There are also numerous plot holes and laughable creature effects. The movie begins with a facehugger that mysteriously materializes onboard the marine cruiser Sulaco. If you paid attention to "Aliens" you should know that the queen CANNOT lay egg pods without growing a large birth sac. It is also unlikely that a facehugger hitched a ride with the queen back to the Sulaco since its behavior dictates that its purpose is solely for procreation and not its own protection. Long story short, the facehugger starts a fire and the Sulaco's computer automatically puts Ripley, Hicks, Bishop, and Newt into an EEV and jettisons it. While drifting in space, the facehugger implants an alien embryo inside Ripley. The EEV crashes into the ocean beside a half shut-down penal colony, and is shortly rescued by the custodial staff, made up mostly of convicted felons. Hicks is impaled by a life support console, Bishop is smashed beyond repair, and Newt drowns in her hypersleep chamber. A prisoner's curious dog prowls the EEV and is attacked and impregnated by THE SAME facehugger that implanted Ripley. (Facehuggers die immediately after one implantation.) Soon, Ripley discovers that a new "dog alien" is loose in the compound and she must rally the prisoners to destroy it before the Company arrives to take it captive and exploit it as a military weapon. (Another mistake--the dog alien takes a considerably shorter time to burst out of the host than Ripley's despite the fact that it was implanted later.) Creature effects utilize early CGI and make the alien look cartoonish. The mixture of trained actors, articulated costumes, and animatronics works much better ("Aliens"). The chase scenes from the alien's point of view are a little ridiculous. Fine performances are given by Sigourney Weaver (as always), Charles Dutton, and Charles Dance, however, it is not enough to sweeten the sour aftertaste of the movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Vastly underappreciated masterpiece.
Review: After reading the enormous amount of negativity at this third entry in the Alien series, I feel highly compelled to step in here and defend this marvelous 1992 sequel to the 1986 predecessor "Aliens" entitled simply "Alien 3" and as I write this, I have to say that while this movie definitely has some troubling flaws, this is a very strong and amazing movie and one of my favorite science-fiction movies of all time. Ellen Ripley, who is now in cryogenic suspension on board the spaceship that she got on to escape the colonized planet after saving Newt from the alien that hitched a ride on board. Unaware of it though, the alien that she defeated was in fact a queen and laid a small egg in a hidden compartment onboard the ship. The alien on board causes an acid spill which causes an electrical fire and the resulting fire causes the escape pod where the survivors of the previous movie to be separated from the mother ship. After crashing into the ocean on a desolate planet, Ripley finds herself once again the only survivor on a totally unknown world. After being revived in a high-security prison called Fury 161, Ripley finds herself being the only woman in a prison with a religious cult comprised of convicted criminals. Now being imprisoned on the planet, she learns her greatest nightmare of all and how much of a big sacrifice must be made in order to destroy the aliens once and for all. However, Ripley has no idea that the alien isn't her only enemy anymore. While this is a great movie, this tends to suffer from some problems which likely has caused a lot of fans of the previous two to really shun this movie. While I can't blame them for killing off two important characters from the previous movie, my biggest problems are different. The greatest flaw with this movie is not it's storyline but it's excessive used of dropping F-Bombs right and left. Swearing doesn't bother me necessarily but the F-Bomb is WAY overused here and it really tends to detract from the films enjoyability. I also wasn't too thrilled at the whole prospect of the prisoners being nothing more than just 'live bait' for the alien to kill off one by one. The "Collector's Edition" is fantastic in many ways. The deeply flawed theatrical release is much better in its remastered form but the "Special Edition" is light years ahead of it's old counterpart. With the film being extended to two hours and thirty-five minutes, with some old footage replaced with previously unreleased footage, along with extended and previously unreleased scenes, "The Special Edition" of "Alien 3" really helps to mend a lot of the problems that plagued the original version and the result is a movie that is almost as great as the first two movies. The only problem I had was the ending which where the ending of the climax scene looked a lot more fake than it did in the original version. Despite this minor quibble, the "Special Edition" of this movie is light years better than the original and the result is a flawed movie that really is lifted much higher in rankings to rank up there with the 1979 original. It'll never top "Aliens" for me but "Alien 3" really benefits from it's revamping. To all of the people who strongly detested this movie to begin with, I would strongly recommend that if you have the time, watch the "Special Edition" because it really helps to correct a lot of the mistakes of the original and it makes the characters a lot more three-dimensional. I have come to appreciate this movie a lot more since seeing it on it's newest form. The second disc is a real treat. The extras on disc two are really good and along with the first disc, warrant purchasing "Alien 3". I at first found that this was a movie that was not easy to digest especially due to its troubling loss of two of the main characters from the previous movie "Aliens" from 1986. However I have since over time have come to really enjoy this movie and have felt more sorry for the crew after seeing a deep insight into how troubled the movies making really was. You can also see the mixed reactions towards the finished film from the crew members who were involved in it's production. Perhaps the most memorable thing I learned even if it's not from the DVD itself was how much agony David Fincher went through when directing this movie. He was pushed into this movie's directing late into it's production and the result was enormous tension between him and other producers which resulted in agonizing almost non-stop work in directing this movie. Perhaps it's why he hasn't embraced it since it's release but I have to credit him that his work on this is fantastic and the result was worth it to me. To me while it isn't the best of the series by any means, "Alien 3" is a really excellent and satisfying conclusion to the storyline of Ellen Ripley and her war against the predatory alien creatures. Like someone else said about it, I strongly agree that "Alien Resurrection" felt more like some wacky spin-off that had almost nothing to do with the previous three movies and I agree. While I'm not saying that it was terrible, it wouldn't have been a bad idea of they had simply closed the series on the third one.
Rating:
Summary: THE BEST OF THEM ALL!!!!
Review: I absolutely adore this third Alien movie!! It's my favorite of the bunch and was a brilliant follow-up to the "Aliens" movie and brings the story to a glorious end which I wish was true but was completely ruined by the stupidity of "Alien Resurrection" which should never have been made or at least in the way it did. Ripley's character is heartbreaking and the action sequences are awesome. The ending is really depressing but really good!! Forget the negative reviews and get this DVD TODAY!! Peace out!!
Rating: 
Summary: I agree that it is much overlooked
Review: I actually saw this on opening day when it was first released. I didn't walk out "liking" it, but I certainly admired the mood and craft of the film; certainly much closer to the first film than James Cameron's superior Aliens (I cite Aliens as the absolute best in the series). As an aside, I find Resurrection to be a film that tries to be all three previous films, but, in the end, fails on all levels (I saw it opening day too and walked out as a rather dissapointed fan). So, back to Alien 3. Fincher has since proven his potential, but it's enjoyable to see his early filmic attempts captured in Alien 3. I sympathize with Cameron's anger about what was done to his characters (sorry, the Ripley that turned up on the cover of Time in 1986 IS Cameron's Ripley). So much more could've been explored between the mother/daughter relationship between Ripley and Newt and some great things could've been done romantically with Ripley and Hicks (now, a developed romance would've been a great step forward for the series--yet another example of how the writers screwed the story over). I don't neccessarily disagree with the controversial ending (it's inevitable that it had to go down that way); I just disagree with the rest of the film leading up to it. So, the strengths are: Direction
Production design
Great mood and tone
Sigourney Weaver (as always!)
Great first film from David Fincher The weaknesses: Poor script
Inadequate character development
Too many missed opportunities
The film says little and doesn't successfully move the commentary from the first two forward I recommend this film for sci-fi enthusiasts and fans of the series, but I don't recommend it for people who like to "feel great" after seeing a film.
Rating: 
Summary: Alien 3 - Much better than I remembered it to be!
Review: I remember the long wait between the release of this movie and "Aliens" and the great amount of anticipation that was built up around this movie considering how extraordinary the first two films were and just imagining how great this one was "going" to be. Then its release date came and it received generally bad reviews and collectively, the majority of the fans were highly disappointed by it, including myself. That being said, I was quite reluctant to spend the money on this DVD but after reading some of the other positive reviews I decided to give this film one more chance and now, after having watched it again I would have to say I've completely changed my mind. Alien 3 just wasn't as bad as I remembered it to be from that one time viewing in the theater so many years ago and in fact, stylistically, it's a movie that was ahead of its time. Ultimately, I think what turned so many people off of this film when it was released is that it was so dramatically different from the first two that it initially just didn't seem as though it belonged in the mythos that is the Alien legacy. The one thing about this film that does make it drag is its pacing. What the director appeared to be reaching for was the same feel that "Alien" engendered but in the end, in reaching for that intense atmosphere didn't always work and only resulted in the pace slowing down and too little suspense. As stated above though, thematically it was just years ahead of its time and I believe, were it a movie that were originally released more recently, with some minor changes, it might've garnered much more success in the theaters. Performance wise, Sigourney Weaver does just as wonderful a job with this film as she did with the first two and, not to mention, she co-produced the film, further showing her support for the script and this addition to the Alien mythos. Charles S. Dutton's role in the film is "over the top," as his acting usually is and it fits quite well with the character. David Fincher, who took up the directing mantle for "Alien 3" deserves a fair amount of credit for the thematic style of this film, bringing the original story and screenplay to fruition. Twelve years ago, I would've said don't ever let the man direct again, but this second viewing of "Alien 3" and after seeing some of the other films he's directed since, I would definitely have to say that he is a very good director! This Collector's Edition release comes with two options, the original 1992 Theatrical version or a 2003 Special Edition. One note of caution, the Special Edition doesn't really add too much to the film, but of the small portion that is added, it helps to set up the story that much better. The THX certification and 5.1 Dolby Surround is perfect for the film, bringing out the score beautifully! The Premise: As Ripley, Hicks, Newt and Bishop are slumbering away in hyper sleep, hoping to next wake up near Earth, the ship suddenly encounters problems of the alien kind. Being the good futuristic starship that it is, it kindly ejects Ripley and the bodies of her companions on a prison planet. Ripley awakens to find herself on this prison planet and not long thereafter, prisoners start showing up dead and Ripley herself finds that her worst nightmare has come true... What follows from there, as stated above, is most certainly not the best of the Alien series but it is most definitely a lot better movie than my initial assessment of it had been. I would definitely recommend this film to any and all fans of the Alien series, as I believe it plays an integral part in the mythos. {ssintrepid} Special Features: -1992 Theatrical version (Deleted/Extended Scene Index) & Alien vs. Predator Teaser Trailer
-2003 Special Edition (Deleted Footage Marker)
-"Development: Concluding the Story" Featurette
-"Tales of the Wooden Planet: Vincent Ward's Vision" Featurette
-"Pre-production, Part III" Featurette
-"Xeno-Erotic: H.R. Giger's Redesign" Featurette
-Still Photo Galleries (multiple)
-"Optical Fury: Visual Effects" Featurette
-"Music, Editing and Sound" Featurette
-"Post-Mortem: Reaction to the Film" Featurette
-"Production, Part I" Featurette
-"Adaptive Organism: Creature Design" Featurette
-"Production, Part II" Featurette
-"Production, Part III" Featurette
-"Furnace Construction: Time Lapse Sequence"
-E.E.V. Scan Multi-Angle Study with Optional Commentary
Rating:
Summary: It's all about direction...
Review: The downward spiral that ends this film is a visual metaphore for this film and the one that follows it. A1 and A2 were tour-de-force vehicles for two extremely talented filmmakers. Enjoy them for the modern day landmark science-horror films they are. They're classics. This one fails because its director is not in the same league as Scott or Cameron. Art Direction, Cinematography, Special Effects are on par - perhaps slightly better than, the first two. Suspense? Thrills? Chills? Fincher isn't up to task. So what's the bottom line? In fairness - it doesn't suck, it's a very pretty, watchable, well-acted film with a reasonabley literate script that is better than the unfair wretched reviews it received at the time of its release. The initial reaction to A3 was the result of the high-level of disappointment of film-goers and critics when it didn't deliver the goods in the suspense and thrills department. The bar was raised high in A1 and even higher in A2 - too high for the A3 production and creative team to match. Still, it's the last of the Alien films that's worth a watch if you're a fan of the series, even if it's a bit of a let down.
Rating:
Summary: shocks what Alien and Aliens had to offer and ups it more
Review: glad i have this on dvd
it will terrify me every time I watch it
this one shocks you 2 times as much as Alien and Aliens
quite a shocker
humorous at times
very shocking visuals
they get more sick and disgusting trust me
I almost puked at the dog mutating into alien scene
I can handle that scene but will never eat again while watching that one scene. it's a real stomach churner
interesting ending the movie has
I mean that seriously
I really like it from beginning to end
it keeps you in suspense while wanting to learn more too
Rating:
Summary: gets better with age
Review: I hated this film when I first saw it - after the gung-ho and mass alien slaughter of the previous film it was hard I think to get worked up about a single alien, plus of course to generate real suspense you need to have some sort of empathy with the characters whose lives are on the line. In short, I felt that the rich legacy of the alien series had been sold short(mind you, have you seen Alien vrs Predator!). But having reluctantly revisited the film recently I've got to say that perhaps I was a bit too quick to dismiss it. Admittedly, it's still a pretty bleak and grim film, and I don't think my girlfriend would thank me if I popped it into the DVD player as we snuggled down one saturday night, but there is much in here to be admired.Have a look at the other reviews is you want a plot synopsis.
At times I struggled to see where all the extra footage of the extended version has been spliced in, however,the different take on Ripley's death is in my opinion is the most obvious, and it has to be said, the most satisfying. In the theatrical version the alien bursts from Ripley's chest just as she's about to disappear into the furnace. This makes it pretty clear that she would've died regardless of whether she'd taken up the offer to have the alien surgucally removed or not. Whereas in the extended version, and in what is very much the ultimate culmination of so much religious imagery, Ripley sacrifices her life so that mankind can live - there is no alien exploding from her chest - in effect she still has the choice between life and death, and it can't get any clearer than the crucifix posture she assumes as she disappears into the flames. For me it underpins everything else that is alluded to, either in word or imagery, throughout the entire film and as such it makes watching the film a far more rewarding experience. I don't know why they weren't brave enough to go with this in the theatrical release.
Rating:
Summary: Rotten script stinks up series.
Review: "Aliens" was a triumphant sequel, taking on all the odds that suggested that sequels "stink." That is why when "Alien 3" was made, we had to know the end of a good run was coming. While "Alien 3" looks good and maybe has a little bit of the feel of the original, it drowns in a terrible storyline and a worse script. First of all, Hicks and Newt (Who Ripley spent the last half hour in "Aliens" saving are killed off right off the bat, wow, what a downer. Ripley is depressed and so was the guy who continued to write the script about a bunch of lifers who say things that make no sense, for example, when the prisoners and Ripley begin building a trap for the Alien, one prisoner asks Ripley "Why should we help you?" Um...maybe because there is an Alien running around and it will eat you if you don't kill it? We are also put through a boring love affair, a cheesy speech by Charles Dutton and a stupid and overly designed scene where everyone is running around dark tunnels trying to trap the Alien. There's no comic relief like in "Aliens" and no real scares like in "Alien." This is just plain stupid, and worse, the sequel that came next. Don't waste your time with this slop, go see the first two films again, it'll be more entertaining.
Rating:
Summary: Viewers should understand this as an art-film
Review: There are so many reviews for this movie that I almost didn't take the time to do one, but I felt I should throw in another positive review for balance. As a huge fan of the films since I snuck a forbidden peek at "Alien" on HBO back in 1980 when I was 11, like other fans of the series I wasn't sure what to do with this one as I left the theater in 1992. Like it's alien, the film moved differently and felt different. But I enjoyed it and still do. I agree with all the comments in other reviews about this being a film much more concerned with mood, lighting, style, and the ideas behind the story, than with the visual splendor of what's on screen. It's thought provoking. So, to me, it's an art film. Perhaps a lot of "Alien" fans didn't think the subject matter should be subjected to an art-film approach, but I think in the end it's a movie worth four stars out of five. Dialogue is a little lame ("They think we're...crud!"), but the melancholy, dark beauty of the film, the characters, it's ever-increasing pace, the religious ideas, and a unique alien physiology make it a great ride.
As noted elsewhere, the ideas behind this story have to do with sin, redemption, sacrifice, and right and wrong moral choices. Director Fincher has dealt with these ideas elsewhere (Seven, Panic Room), and here they inhabit a horror story. Roger Ebert has said that the aliens in these films, though primordially savage, are really just neutral; a force of nature, which take on whatever purpose the director wants them to. This may have been alluded to in one of the other 280 reviews I missed, but I recall an interview in which Sigourney Weaver suggested that the creature in Alien 3 can be seen as a metaphor for AIDS. For all those inclined to misinterpret people, I'm not saying the movie is meant to take any stance on the issue other than to evoke emotions and thoughtfulness about the disease, and more importantly, disease and death in general.
Here we have a closed, paranoid, sexually repressed, rigidly dogmatic society into which a fatal "contagion" of inexplicable origin is introduced. They happen to be all male, but could have been all female, or whatever. They are actually androgynous (as Ripley becomes) in the bald heads and baggy clothes. The male gender just works because Ripley, as female, is a grave threat to the male "good thing going here" of which Dutton's character speaks. All the nice explanations about the queen from "Aliens" laying another egg on the Sulaco, etc., kill the whole point: the source of the "alien/contagion/disease" is a mystery. Where did that alien/disease come from? Bishop's enigmatic response: "it was with us all the way." Ripley, Dr. Clemmons, and Mr. Andrews lie to and evade one another about the reality of it, as they do with their pasts. Ripley suddenly after two films becomes sexual, and acts sexually in an almost uninhibited fashion. The deceipt still continues. And the price of their deceipt, well-intentioned as it may be, is the high cost of human lives. The alien/disease has taken on a new form, mutated, to adapt to its environment, as all effective diseases do. And it will take the whole community banding together to defeat the killer force; even then, it exacts a high toll. So in the end we're meant to ponder, I think, how the taboos of disease, sexuality, and death, impact our society. We can interpret for ourselves who "The Company," caring only about using the disease for profit, is supposed to symbolize.
Other thoughts are that this film is stylistically gorgeous--an appropriately dark, earth-toned, and creepy horror film. Not having seen the special edition, I was fascinated to learn that the host for the soldier alien in the original screenplay was an ox. One wonders about the religious imagery of the ox as a sacrificial animal, and as a beast of burden. Parting thought: if this film had been released as the only Alien film without baggage from or references to the first two, we all would have thought it was an amazing horror film.
|
