Aliens from James Cameron became one of the most important blockbusters of the 80s and collected a very good amount at the box office, from which the producers of the studio 20 Century Fox decided that the story of Ripley should be continued without fail. The third film was directed by David Fncher, who had previously directed music videos, and he saw this as an excellent opportunity to make his way to big Hollywood.
After being rescued from a planetoid on the Sulaco, Ripley and her friends went to the capsules to fall asleep before arriving on Earth, but on the way there was a system failure and the computer disconnected the rescue shuttle with people right above the prison planet. Unfortunately, after landing, only Ripley survived and now she is at the disposal of a group of prisoners longing for female affection.
However, Ripley is primarily concerned that a strange egg could have arrived with someone else’s egg. And very soon all her worries become reality, because the monster actually found himself here and began his hunt for people. There are no weapons here, because the prison is operating, but it is on the verge of closing. Which means Ripley and the rest of the inmates must band together to kill a stranger until he cracks down on the entire group.
The filmmakers decided to follow in the footsteps of the first part and show only one monster in the frame. But unlike the sequel, where the aliens were the sea and they were killed in whole packs, here we have specifically one terrible and extremely dangerous alien killer who survives against all odds and kills people with special sophistication. So we went from space action to horror and slasher, and it looks, by the way, quite convincing.
In general, the film has a gloomy atmosphere and literally blows hopelessness from it. Ripley has lost everyone she loved and is in a sad mood. Around her frankly gloomy landscapes, and she can rely only on herself, because the men around are prisoners without moral guidelines. From the style of Cameron and Scott, the rest is not much, but it is this plot gloom and anxiety that made the triquel special.
Alien 3 is definitely a movie that fits perfectly into the canon of the series. Of course, it is very sad that the events of the second part are almost destroyed by the introduction of Fincher’s film, but in the history of others positive notes a priori can not be much.
“Alien” is primarily a horror, not an action movie.
David Fincher did a pretty good job, especially since he was a young director who was making a feature film for the first time. And not just a film, because on the shoulders of Fincher fell responsibility for the continuation of such a famous and cult franchise. It is clear that until “Alien” 1979, the 3rd part does not reach, but the same level would be naive to demand. What was possible was done.
When you watch this movie, you know it’s a horror movie. Gloomy and not for family viewing. And these criteria are just one of those things for which it is worth loving the alien universe. In Part 3, the spirit of the first film is felt, when the main characters are, by and large, defenseless against the monster and forced to really try to fight for their lives, wandering through dark tunnels. They don’t have any firearms, which only adds to the film’s desperation. Although you are not particularly worried about all but 1-2 people, but this is already because of the contingent shown in the film.
At the same time, no clearly fresh ideas (except for a new kind of xenomorph, which of course is a plus) this film does not bring to the franchise, but it is well and expensively shot, it is interesting to watch, it keeps in suspense - these are very serious advantages for which the picture can be praised. And in general, it is better to do without experiments, as in 3 parts, than to shoot something like an innovative, but losing the flavor of the universe, as it happened with the above-mentioned “Aliens”, which instead of cosmohorror turned out to be an action movie.
Honestly, I think it was worth putting Ripley's story behind it, making it a trilogy. Everything here may not look perfect, but logical, whole, complete and sad — a good conclusion to the storyline for horror. “Resurrection” became a pure sucking from the finger.
7 out of 10
The first two films about someone else were very successful and for a long time entrenched among the list of the great classics of cinema. First of all, this result was achieved through the selection of skilled directors. And this time there are no problems in this aspect, but the same result was not achieved. The film did not meet expectations and showed a much worse level of quality. And I specifically agree with that. I also have a lot of questions about my work, although it doesn’t contain any bad things. Therefore, in more detail below.
The plot takes us to a prison where a ship with our heroine lands. It immediately turns out that only Ellen Ripley survived among the heroes of the previous picture. This is bad news, of course, but even worse is the fact that a monster we know is entering the prison. Therefore, we will see how the heroine, along with the violators of the law, will resist this. I can say that the bundle is not too inventive, but generally acceptable. I was more embarrassed that past characters had this ending. But as for the events of this tape, I support the choice of prison as the main venue for events. It's perfect for such cases, as is the ship. There’s a lot that can be done about it, and we’ll really see some of the potential.
Let's get to the flaws. And sadly enough, the biggest drawback is the stranger himself. For this time he does not inspire fear. This is the worst thing that this character can do. This happened for two reasons. The first is how he was portrayed. It is not clear why its size was reduced several times. And now it resembles not a great monster, but somehow an incomprehensible beast. Although I think I know why this happened, namely because of the use of graphics. So they thought, why would we use a real prototype when we could just draw it? And the result was really bad and not impressive. Although the film itself has moments of using a real layout, and it looks quality. The second reason is that he is no longer hiding. That is, it is used as you like and the impression that on command. You do not believe that this is a rational and not foreseeable creature, but just a creature trying to impress us with banal techniques. So, in my opinion, there has been an obvious degradation.
As for other aspects, not everything is so critical. The atmosphere is unstable, sometimes it holds, sometimes it is not felt. I don't understand the decision to actively use light. That is, the location itself is interesting and you can use a suspense element, but most of the time we have almost perfect lighting. In such conditions, it is very difficult to create a good nervous scene. Well, at least with sound, circumstances are better and its effects have a more correct application.
Let's talk about characters. It's also controversial. Let's start with our main character. There are no complaints to her in terms of acting work, no one like she does not understand what needs to be demonstrated. And in terms of her character, everything is well preserved, although there were no such strong moments as in previous works. But the finale that was prepared for her, I did not like it very much. First, I would like a slightly different development. And secondly, it is quite concretely akin to the end of one film, released on the eve of this work. The rest of the members of the picture do their work as needed, I did not notice any big problems. Only, unfortunately, they are not used seriously and most of them are just bait for our monster.
The verdict. As we can see, for the third time the formula of the creators failed. They could not work out the script so competently and tried to make everything as easy as possible. During the viewing, it does not feel that the authors had an idea that could surprise us, but only a desire to rise on the path of past merit. So we got a rather inventive sequel, which is not downright bad, but done without much talent. It is up to you to watch or not.
So from the last two parts, we learned that Aliens are something that reproduces, probably like ants... they have a womb... soldiers. We haven't seen a drone yet. They are afraid of fire and powerful bullets, as well as, of course, a thermonuclear explosion, easily survive in any environment, even in outer space. They have at least some acute sense of self-preservation and survival right from the moment they hatch. They are very inquisitive and as soon as you approach them ... they will show you their smile with a metallic gloss, they will offer a suicide selfie or hug your face, if they are very small ... with all claws straight and straight up the tonsils they will come to visit you with a full and deeper examination. In fact, they are excellent loras and all dentists envied them in their time... Hollywood smile with them and still do.
As always, the movie is full of people. Here, for example, you can see one of the Lannisters, who was sent to eternal sleep in confusion. Unfortunately, the film has completely lost the thread of the past plot ... it was cut, but so unceremoniously. Never mind. The main thing we remember: Aliens in this franchise is not the main evil, the main thing is a person, corporations ... thirst for profit, self-interest ... because of it, in the first part, the team was sent to capture an alien, and in the second whole settlement, and then the marines were sent to feed non-existent space birds, and in general, quite existing arachnid reptiles of aliens. At the same time, the authors emphasized that even androids are not enemies here.
_
In short, in order not to worry about many things, this movie must be watched in isolation from other parts. It is better to completely clean the brain figuratively. Forget everything you've seen before. You have to look like something original. Non-trivial. It is better, of course, to live this way, every year, every day in isolation from all past and possible future. Suddenly tomorrow will not come ... for someone in this movie certainly the local sun will not shine more.
Our movie is a little more psychological, but not finished. There's no mystery. If you could completely subtract the backstory ... not to show half the movie itself the Alien character, then the tape would be much more interesting ... for example, people die, and no one knows why ... only Ripley, but even she does not tell anyone anything, but investigates something there or sabotages so that no one and nothing escapes from the planet ... and even the audience is not in the course - this would be much more interesting: something mysterious on the unknown planet of the "cons." But our story is different.
For the rest of us, Soldier Jane (she even shaved... with each episode, her hair is shorter and shorter, and now she is naked) . . . . stuck between men who have not seen ooh-oh-oh how many women.
The third film in the series “Alien” with confidence can be considered the most long-suffering in terms of the shooting process and desirable for the creators who wanted to finish work on it as soon as possible.
The project “Aliens”, staged by Cameron and released in 1986, set a new bar for space horror, combining into one genre of horror, science fiction, drama and action.
The plot of the film revolves around Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), who, along with the survivors of the events of the second part, is in cryos. That's just an emergency situation that occurred on board the spacecraft, leads to the fact that the rescue capsule with people makes an emergency landing on the planet Fiorina-161 - a maximum security prison where dangerous male criminals with an extra y chromosome are kept. There are dozens of people living there, including prisoners and guards. On the planet reigns terrible unsanitary, so everyone has to shave their hair to avoid catching lice. Once in the company of men who have not seen women for more than one year, Ripley has to find his associates among them and fight off another Alien who was able to penetrate Fiorina-161.
It is possible that the final script of the third “Alien” in the state in which it reached the film adaptation, is his best option. Several different versions of the text from different writers could compete with each other in a degree of absurdity, but not in the original development of the story of Ellen Ripley and the Alien.
For example, Eric Red’s script suggested that Alien cells could assimilate living and non-living matter, and the evolution of monsters reached the point where Aliens, Alien Chickens and even Aliens were born. Plus, the military wanted to tame Aliens to attack Moscow. David Tui’s script, if implemented, would suggest that the creators of “Alien 3” and Steven Spielberg with his “Jurassic Park”, sailed in the same boat, because both would use the theme with a DNA cell in a piece of amber. The project of Vincent Ward and John Phasano completely transferred the action to the wooden planetoid, where they live. Monks! Well, the very first version, on which William Gibson worked, was based on the theme of the Cold War and continued the history of confrontation between two superpowers, one of which was America (the company Weyland Yutani), and the other – the USSR / Russia (the so-called Union of Progressive Peoples).
Producers David Giler and Walter Hill, who started all this cotovasiya with the scripts, tried to put their hands on writing the plot themselves, but it turned out to be clumsy, to put it mildly. Then there was already on the horizon another young director (as in his time it was with Cameron) – David Fincher, for whom “Alien 3” became not so much a great start-up as a torture, because Giler and Hill did all the things they knew how to (probably) do best – put sticks in the wheels in those things in which they knew nothing.
Perhaps, had it not been for their “managerial” approach, Fincher would have been more supportive of the film and agreed in 2004 to 20th Century Fox’s offer to specialize in all four films on DVD – Alien Quadrilogy. The studio really wanted David Fincher to edit his version of the film and recorded comments on it, but David refused, becoming the only director who refused to have anything to do with the project after filming was completed.
Despite all the problems that arose when writing the script, despite the so-called “production hell”, “Alien 3” still deserves not only attention from the viewer, but also a high degree of respect for the fact that the Aliens and Ripley franchise did not follow the template path for sequels and triquels, choosing its own unique path. The story of the second part with a kind of open ending, ends at the very beginning of the third, after which, in fact, the whole connection is cut off (if you do not take into account Ripley herself). The third “Alien” stands as if alone and acts as an offshoot, but with the same main character. The film finally leads the alien killers to the goal they were trying to achieve - they end up on the planet (though not on Earth - it will happen in a few years).
At the same time, Alien 3 is significantly inferior in the entertainment of the second part and, as it were, “rolls back” closer to the first film, concentrating the viewer’s attention on the struggle of people with one monster, rather than an entire army. But again, this development of the story looks more interesting than one of the scenarios where Aliens land on Earth and attack New York, you agree?
Finally, one of the significant differences from the previous parts is the presence of elements of 3D graphics in the film, which in some scenes influenced the realism of the monster and made it possible to assess the then computer capabilities.
With all its pros and cons, “Alien 3” turns out to be a worthy continuation of the first two parts, although it does not surpass either of them. However, it was the 1992 film that looped the story of Ellen Ripley, although a few years later the writers found a way to return it to the fourth part of the classic series.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
Complicated film, both in terms of filming and in terms of writing. The doom on screen corresponds perfectly to the doom behind the scenes. David Fincher or the whole team, because everyone wanted to direct Alien 3. Constant editing of the script, cutting scenes, destroying some scenery and creating others. In the center of this is David Fincher, who does not consider the film his work and not without reason.
All of the above could not benefit the film. It looks “raw” in both theatrical and directorial versions. Here it is worth mentioning that the director's version, I almost do not remember, so the speech in the review will be about theatrical mainly.
The fact that this “final” is felt all the time, here and the music is tragic, and the initiation shows that everything is coming to an end. “Alien 3” is a drama and there is nothing wrong with this, but many moments look outstretched by the ears, especially the socket, annoying at the end of running through the corridors, nothing for me as a viewer, except the desire to look at the clock did not add. With bright images in the film trouble. Really interesting characters are few. Which further kills the interest in viewing. While the previous films characters were written much brighter.
With the technical side, Alien 3 is also not very successful. The poor rendering of light in some scenes with the creature itself is a step backwards from previous pictures.
Soundtrack. Here we must pay tribute, especially knowing that in a matter of days, without having a clear script, Elliot Goldenthal wrote a really strong musical series.
Alien 3 isn’t bad or good, it’s just not perfect. If the creators had a clearer idea from the very beginning about how the story will develop, then the plot would turn out to be more holistic and thoughtful, and therefore there would be no constant reshoots, which would make it possible to refine and more convincing study of special effects. And so to praise the film for nothing, but I do not want to scold it. I liked the idea after all.
The unrestrained desire of the industry to extract profit faced with the irresistible enthusiasm of David Fincher to make an original film. ' Alien 3' are the first sketches of the future punisher of the consumer society - the creator of the Fight Club ', recently - the author of commercials for large corporations, today - balancing on the verge between mass cinema and the author's style David Andrew Leo Fincher.
Creating a triquel is a thankless activity in itself. Who here can give an example of at least one successful triquel? And a successful triquel that looks on par with previous great films? David Fincher - yesterday's clipmaker, did not even have the theoretical opportunity to make such a movie. Fincher was preceded by giants Ridley Scott and James Cameron. These are tyrannosaurs, who went through a long journey of changing professions, until they finally realized their vocation - to make films.
Dave was from a slightly different cast - a successful clipmaker the industry recognized and gave the chance for something more - to do the impossible and film a decent sequel to the story of xenomorphs (and how to destroy them). Mr. Fincher got a picture that came straight out of the production hell. The story of the creation ' Alien 3' genre reminiscent of dystopia, itself being a tragedy on the theme of production control and the crisis of ideas for endless sequels in order to earn.
Fincher got into the thick of the meat grinder - after a series of dismissals and conflicts, David was called to help. And initiated his dismissal and new conflicts. The third part ' Alien' metaphorical - the creation of this film is reminiscent of the birth of the xenomorph himself. This time it was David Fincher. And the truth - he came off the set ' Alien 3' another person, almost gray.
The film is praised for its semantic context, an epilogue uncharacteristic for science fiction, religious overtones and atmosphericity. Fighting xenomorph is a corporate dream 'Weyland-Yutani' but as redemption for local prisoners. Our animal was not ready for such a semantic load, which symbolically reflected on the visual of the monster - his movements in the frame look almost epileptic.
Xenomorph has been courting Ellen Ripley since 1979, but has always stayed in the friendzone. 1992 was a turning point for this relationship - the beauty and the monster found each other. This bond is indestructible - even Jonesy's cat has disappeared, and our hero is always on the first roles. The decision to exclude the heroes of the previous film is strange, because they have no analogues. Local criminals do not cause enough disgust to be called maniacs. At the same time, there is not enough screen time to reveal the inconsistencies of the characters, since there are a large number of bald prisoners here. The only one that sparks interest is Clemens (Charles Dance), but Fincher needed the character for a special purpose - to reflect on the themes of Ellen Ripley's loneliness. Yes, xenomorph does not tolerate competitors.
This approach to the cast - to exclude the individualization of the characters, but to bring them under the common denominator of redemption before the world with his battle with the monster, in the third part did not work. Cameron worked with actors much more intensively - future Marines were required to read 'Star Troops' Heinlein, where the narrative is conducted on behalf of the ideological military. In addition, each of the actors (with the exception of Michael Bean) took a special training course for infantry. However, the military in the second part is also united by a common idea - only militarism, according to Cameron, was able to curb commercial atrocities ' Weyland-Yutani'.
The bright spot in the black hole - 'Alien 3' is Lance Henriksen as Bishop. Only half of the android is represented here. This fact should be interpreted with humor. The appearance of the robot and its habitat symbolize the attitude of the authors to the past two films. The creators did not spare even the ship 'Sulako' - the management of it was captured by either the producers of the film, or xenomorphs and killed everything. Pets decided to return to intimate psychology, preferring noisy parties of the second part of a series of romantic dates, reminiscent of the style of the first film.
The only thing that turned out well in this movie is the ending. Otherwise ' Alien 3' deserves a negative assessment and is a miscarriage from the bosom of the industry, an example of unsuccessful births with a constant change of medical staff. David Fincher could only cut off that umbilical cord, but he did it with a charm - apparently he wasn't even given a tool for it, he had to do everything by hand. This film had only to be burned in the fire of the steel mill, which Fincher did.
Tthe film cannot be called cult, the picture did not imply ' informal' and the director was not included in the project since the beginning of work on the tape. Cult films of the 90s: 'Pulp Fiction', 'Natural Born Killers', 'Star Troopers', 'Shougels', 'Fight Club', 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' (and others) had no such problems at the production stage, and their scripted premises from the very beginning carried a specific meaning. These works implied reaction of their authors to the problems of the world of consumption and its mechanization, reflection on the topic of further development of such a social system. And Tarantino did create his own genre. In addition, each of these films was conceptual and logically completed.
' Alien 3' is not conceptual - by the time Fincher began his work, two have already visited his post, and you can not remember the writers (there were only 5-7 of them). To the constant personnel brawls added ghosts from the past - Michael Bean (played Hicks in the second film) showed wonders of pedantry, fighting off a lot of money for the fleeting use of his image.
The story of work on ' Alien 3' deserves film adaptation, the genre - from tragedy to comedy. This movie would be a fine satire over the whims of the film industry and a manic inclination to continue successful first films. The film itself is not underrated, especially cult. This movie just didn't happen. You can't make a dead child scream. Here we go on 'Alien 3' you can only cry.
It's not easy with this movie... From the beginning of creation to the exit and acceptance by the audience.
When I was a kid, I watched a theater version. I did not think about anything sacred and did not ask questions. But, to confess, all these “aliens” yours did not matter to me. Now they do. Now these "Aliens" are all mine!
Having watched about "Alien 3" (I don't want to joke about "in the cube") a special version, I was visited by the desire to quickly patch the holes. The Foxes did hell. Let’s try to figure out what to do.
We see how the lifeboat due to an emergency situation on the "Sulako" "spun off" and a stone collapsed on Fiorina 161. As a result of the fall, only Ripley survives from "ours." And the wreckage Bishop. Fiorina 161 is a planet whose main location is a prison for dangerous criminals. However, Ripley is not alone... How can you not see them in the Aliens franchise? Same thing! Of course, there are representatives from Lycevats.
And here it is appropriate to assume that the clutches, like the eggs, were more than one. This is an absolute fan assumption. But it suited me. The xenomorph was born of a bull, not a dog. But-- It should have been done with other things being equal to horns. In fact, the origin of the dog in the theater is also shown great! Anyway, we learn some details about Ripley... It is these details, well, so that without spoilers, and eloquently shout that the face grip, as before, there were at least two eggs. Where did the egg come from? Well, if you listen carefully to Bishop, you can hear that Alien was always on the ship. The conclusions are logical. And the denouement, which showed Weyland, these conclusions only strengthen.
But eating with an egg and lycembraces is somehow possible to understand and connect, that is, something that needs censure. We are shown a prison where very dangerous criminals are kept. And yet there are no weapons... Jesus. I have everything, as they say. I understand that Sigourney Weaver has pushed this moment. But damn it, it's a prison! Are there no firearms to keep order?!
Triquel showed a new kind of Alien. This is a runner. The franchise itself not only didn’t move forward, it rolled back. The picture looks fragmented. It's like another movie. That's kind of weird. A good continuation began, albeit very bold, and ended as if something else. But the triquel gave a memorable scene of sniffing xenomorph Ripley. This scene is cool.
In any case, although Fincher was made responsible, you need to understand that it was for shooting. David Fincher has done a great job. His tweaks with producers and studio bosses did not move to the set, where harmony reigned in comparison with the film.
I think it makes sense. And not only on this tape, but also logical throughout the trilogy. The fourth part was not needed. Everything was shown here.
I know a lot of people love strangers as family. But it is better to look the truth in the eye and understand the fact that from the third part of the series began to beat in agony. The filmmakers only confirm this.
But it was a strange time. Especially against the background of the literally thundering sequel to the Aliens, which only strengthened the staging talent of Cameron. And that's when it started. Already two parts have been filmed and the vector of the series development should already be developed, but everything has gone somewhere and the true intricacies in this movie party are difficult to track. In any case, the filming specifically went through the psyche of the then young David Fincher, who has since been afraid to contact the continuations of popular films.
And the very development of the series has rolled down quite a lot relative to the history of the alien. Here, Alien acts more and more as a background and besides, he is alone in an absolutely unarmed colony, which is hardly technically possible with the abundance of dumped garbage (yes, they even have a smelter for metals here!!!) In general, it is a very industrial prison, made on the principle of a gender community. That is, the criminals here are exclusively male. The prison also has many life support compartments. Against this background, it is very funny to see the most dangerous convicts of galactic scale in the entourage of fettering fear. It is clear that convicts are different, but they must have the skills to counteract and more armed representatives of law and order, if they have entered the criminal path. And then the problem looms - the film says almost nothing about the global foreword of this prison. The prisoners here are the same meat that suddenly got scared of a single alien.
It was also bad that, apart from Ripley in the second film, no one else survived. And it's pretty weird. It seems that all flew together, but there were no scratches on Ripley, and the rest quickly died along with the android.
And the special effects here are generally hilarious... Unnatural computer alien amusingly running on all fours, breaking out of the prison scenery. Although the previous tapes had practical special effects. I'm not talking about the ridiculous ending. Physics is clearly wrong with the authors.
As a result, with this film began the fall of the series, which can not rise until now. And also amazing is the release of the 4th film, which scored the last rivet into the lid of the reinforced concrete sarcophagus of the xenomorph universe.
No, you don't. Hand on heart, the triquel never sympathized. In the days of cassettes, when everyone was watching the version with the dog (under 2 hours), it was pulling to sleep. Now I have checked out the extended version, which exceeds 2 hours. Yes, there is a bull instead of a dog.
I agree, the expanded version looks a little better, but the picture loses to the works of Cameron and Scott (significantly). The script is to blame, of course. Rewritten-rewritten-rewritten, as a result, a strange catavasia. And Fincher was kicked out, the director was offended, sent three-letter producers along with the film, a-hee-hee.
Actually, it's not a bad shell. Dirty and cold prison, atmospheric, calmly shoot a terrible horror, but Fincher somehow leaves the Alien in the direction of people. Talk about religion and God. I don't know, controversial. Plus, take Charles Dance's character, for example. You penetrate him, he talks about his fate, and then Fincher lowers the character into the toilet. You wonder if you should have spent so much time on it.
Crumpled montage, again. And the alien himself cuts our eyes. Rather, his outdated graphics (even Scott did not have such rejection, although the difference between the tapes is more than 10 years). Especially in those moments when the alien is shown from afar (robbed there headlong). Pity. But Sigourney Weaver still decently plays Ripley.
Without spoilers, I am absolutely against this ending. I understand that the creators wanted to put an end (judging by the fourth part, not too much), but it should not be. It was too much drama. They've crossed out a lot of what Cameron showed us. And then, uh, no words. Worse!
As for the alleged underestimation of the tape – no, guys, criticized her in the case. Tiring.
20 years before I was born, the British director Sir Ridley Scott created one of the best films of the genre “psychological thriller” – “Alien”. Seven years later, James Cameron added to the existing material about the Alien and translated the story of aliens with sliding jaws into the category of militants. After six years, David Fincher went to extremes, making the third Alien a mostly drama. That’s only with all my respect to this director and cult created by the Alien, the third part can not be called preserving the atmosphere of the series of films.
Perhaps the effect of inflated expectations plays a role, because given the level at which the previous two films were released, the triquel should have become almost a masterpiece. And at first glance, "Alien 3" tries to keep up with its predecessors, locking the characters in a confined space alone with the creature, placing Ellen Ripley in the center of the ongoing processes, even begins as past films - the characters are in cryocapsules, then wake up. But the rescue shuttle, guided by the rule “We do not need brakes, we will break from the heart!”, falls on a planet turned into one continuous prison. All the passengers of the shuttle die except Ripley. In addition to Ripley, on the zone there is also a face grip, somehow caught on board the shuttle. So the “thunderstorm of xenomorphs” has to fear not only the new Alien, but also look around, for the convicts the female body is new.
In a review of the third Blade, I pointed out that a project created in the context of rumbling hatred could not be doomed to success. Alien 3" ran into these rakes. The script was rewritten, in my opinion, six times, but the director himself became a separate obstacle. David Fincher, who at that time shot mainly clips and commercials, was hired by the bosses of the 20th Century Fox studio to play the role of a puppet. Known for his independent character, Fincher, although he did the work, but quarreled with the producers, and he was kicked in the ass immediately after filming, not even allowed to mount the footage. Producers took on this responsibility, throwing 40 minutes out of the film. It’s funny that after a while Fincher will make Fight Club, where people follow the rule “Tyler Durden is always right.” With David the same situation, may debut and seems unsuccessful, but subsequent films he showed that he has his own vision, the main thing is not to interfere.
Constant script changes and reshoots have led to an increase in the budget, but the element of hacking still scorches like a drunken teenager trying to pretend to be sober when talking to his mom. The prison in the course of the plot is based on an abandoned factory, and the ruins look like a heap of iron on the principle of a house of cards. The alien appeared in a new form, bred from the dog, but the computer graphics of the alien look so terrible that with tears you remember the doll of xenomorphs from the second part, which were controlled by threads, and looked more realistic. Acting work at the same time does not cause complaints. The character of Sigourney Weaver on the plot lost a lot - friends from "Aliens", hair, a chance for a quiet life. But by showing internal weaknesses, she managed to bend a dramatic line. Also, my interest was won by Charles Dance and Charles Dutton. In the circle of prisoners who are driven by spermotoxicosis in relation to Ripley, these two are perceived as good guys.
Despite all the roughness of the project, "Alien 3" cannot be called a miscarriage of the franchise. He continues the story of Ellen Ripley and puts a logical point. Yes, there is also Alien: Resurrection, but this part was filmed purely for money, the story is thrash, and nothing remembers it, except the masterful throw of Sigourney Weaver basketball in the basket. In the same way, I am not going to consider the prequel line given by "Prometheus" and "Covenant." And about the crossover with Predators and nothing to say.
20 years before I was born, British director Sir Ridley Scott created one of the finest psychological thriller films, Alien. Seven years later, James Cameron added to the existing material about the Alien and translated the story of aliens with sliding jaws into the category of militants. Six years later, David Fincher went to extremes, making the third Alien a mostly drama. That’s just with all my respect to this director and the cult created by the Alien, the third part can not be called preserving the atmosphere of a series of films.
Perhaps the effect of inflated expectations plays a role, because given the level at which the previous two films were released, the triquel should have become almost a masterpiece. And at first glance, “Alien 3” tries to keep up with its predecessors, locking the characters in a confined space alone with the creature, placing Ellen Ripley in the center of the ongoing processes, even begins as past films – the characters are in cryocapsules, then wake up. But the rescue shuttle, guided by the rule of “brakes we do not need, we will break from the heart!”, falls on a planet turned into one continuous prison. All the passengers of the shuttle die except Ripley. In addition to Ripley, on the zone there is also a face grip, somehow caught on board the shuttle. So the “thunderstorm of xenomorphs” has to fear not only the new Alien, but also look around, for the convicts the female body is new.
In my review of the third Blade, I pointed out that a project created in the context of rumbling hatred cannot be doomed to success. "Alien 3" ran into these rakes. The script was rewritten, I think, six times, but a separate obstacle was the director himself. David Fincher, who at the time shot mostly clips and commercials, was hired by 20 Century Fox studio bosses to play the role of a puppet. Known for his independent character, Fincher, although he did the work, but quarreled with the producers, and he was kicked in the ass immediately after filming, not even allowed to mount the footage. Producers took on this responsibility, throwing 40 minutes out of the film. It’s funny that after a while Fincher will shoot Fight Club, where people follow the rule “Tyler Durden is always right.” With David the same situation, may debut and seems unsuccessful, but subsequent films he showed that he has his own vision, the main thing is not to interfere.
Constant script changes and reshoots have led to an increase in the budget, but the element of hacking still scorches like a drunken teenager trying to pretend to be sober when talking to his mom. The prison in the course of the plot is based on an abandoned factory, and the ruins look like a heap of iron on the principle of a house of cards. The alien appeared in a new form, bred from the dog, but the computer graphics of the alien look so terrible that with tears you remember the doll of xenomorphs from the second part, which were controlled by threads, and looked more realistic. Acting work at the same time does not cause complaints. The character of Sigourney Weaver on the plot lost a lot - friends from "Aliens", hair, a chance for a quiet life. But by showing internal weaknesses, she managed to bend a dramatic line. Charles Dance and Charles Dutton also won my interest. In the circle of prisoners who are driven by spermotoxicosis in relation to Ripley, these two are perceived as good guys.
Despite all the roughness of the project, Alien 3 cannot be called a miscarriage of the franchise. He continues the story of Ellen Ripley and puts a logical point. Yes, there is also “Alien: Resurrection”, but this part was filmed purely for money, the story in it is thrash, and nothing remembers it, except for the masterful throw of Sigourney Weaver basketball in the basket. In the same way, I’m not going to have a line of prequels set by Prometheus and Covenant. And about the crossover with Predators and nothing to say.
The Alien franchise began as a dark thriller. And although Cameron in 1986 shot the second part as an action movie, the gloom in Aliens has not gone away. But another six years passed, and the then still beginning director David Fincher took up the business, who completely unexpectedly decided to make a triquel a drama. This did not go well, causing a lot of outrage among fans, although the third part got its fan base.
Trouble does not leave Ripley alone, overtaking her this time in prison with dangerous criminals, very reminiscent of a medieval castle, as well as the mood of the film itself. Didn’t the writers initially want to unfold events in Earth’s recent past? The idea would almost certainly have failed, but it would have surpassed all other films. But it turned out that it turned out, and Ripley for the third time has to escape from an alien organism that wants her to die. It looks all very strained, and the invariable yellow color scheme drives into depression. Many people know that the thriller category perfectly combines cold blue-blue tones, and “yellowness” is characteristic of something fading. In fact, that’s true — that’s what the franchise was doing at the time.
Instead of a beehive of xenomorphs with a stunning queen, the focus is once again on a single individual. It’s not like the ones in the first two movies. This time we are shown the Runner, who appeared in different versions of the film either from a cow or a dog. In many ways, it is the same xenomorph as before, with characteristics common to the species as a whole. The problem is not with him, but with the way he is shown. The Alien franchise is characterized by such a feature as the growing reluctance with each subsequent part to create detailed worlds of the future. If the first "Alien" is still striking in its authenticity, then in "Aliens" you can already notice a couple of "jobs", especially in episodes with shuttle flights. In the third part, the creators of special effects do not even try to disguise the green shadow cast by the xenomorph and the sharp outlines of its contours, which give out the use of very low-quality computer graphics. How is that possible? Why did creators put less and less effort into creating sequels? The questions are rhetorical.
Filled with not catchy drama, the main plot and an unnecessarily pathetic finale – that’s all that the third part consists of. Sigourney Weaver, whom I dislike, plays here, admittedly, not bad. Memorable was the character Charles Dance, pleases the small appearance of Lance Henriksen, but the remaining characters are so many, and their images are so uninteresting that they disappear from memory after a long time after watching. I only remember the part of Pete Postlethwaite, and that only because I saw him in other films.
As much as I would like to give this film a rating, it is impossible to deceive everyone and myself: the third part was unsuccessful. Of course, it is better than the nightmare fourth film, but it is a shame that the further direction in the development of the plot was chosen incorrectly.
4 out of 10
So, despite the neutral gray color of the review, my attitude towards the film is predominantly negative and close to red. But I will not do an emotional and highly detailed analysis. Given the fact that all this must be crammed into the volume of thousands of words, without spoilers, without outbursts of anger and exits into the wild wild wild wild wild wilds, captivating you up to fixation on this topic (and popping up in other topics), and even expect editing during moderation, all this is impossible to implement normally, and in the end you will get something aggressive, overly cut, inconsistent and torn, often incomprehensible and similar to the crazy incoherent notes that are many of my old initiatives. Everything will be as quiet as possible here.
The first “Alien” was quite strong and atmospheric space horror with an original idea and the mystery of the unknown. It was strange and stupid, a couple of predictable, but the film managed to frighten the image and essence of the monster, showed new beautiful and fascinating images. The second film “Aliens” not only consolidated the success of the original, but also in many ways surpassed it and pumped dignity to the maximum. The development of the main character, careful attitude to the visual and stylistic range, logical innovations and an excellent expansion of the universe. And it would be better to leave the dilogy.
The film “Alien 3” at the time of the beginning and at the moment cult director David Fincher became a victim of production hell, the director disowns the film as soon as he can and does not consider it his own. You know, there's two sides. Let's look at each one.
On the one hand, the producers changed the script and plot of the future triquel several times, spent a lot of money on expensive and unused sets, pressed Fincher, exhausted him and quarreled with him, preventing him from realizing and making a whole and complete film with their innovations and ideas, cut a lot of moments that you will not find now either in the rental theatrical version (which I know all my life – a carrier-dog), or in an expanded director close to Fincher, which the director wanted his film (by-carrier, sub-scene). However, to spare and give the final film and its two versions of indulgence is not worth it. For such speeches can justify any mediocrity and just a terrible film. Whether or not the film was actually ruined during production and filming, this excuse should have no weight. The result was terrible – and no fascinating creation stories and additional materials with cut moments will fix it. It's a pity, yes, but it's pointless. It’s like a slowly dying, clumsy Frankenstein thing, which is better to euthanize to not suffer.
Now the other side. That Fincher had his own vision and wanted to make his own film wanted, as he put it, to make a shocking, frostbitten and graphically violent film. And, indeed, among the cut scenes, which are not in any version, there is a detailed autopsy of the body of the deceased girl up to the extraction of organs (for some reason), an intimate scene between the heroine and the doctor (not at all in the character of Ripley), more elongated and expanded scenes from those two versions, and so on. On the one hand, I would look at it, and on the other... This is not cruelty and brutality, but cruelty for the sake of cruelty! Once again, there is a fine line between fear and disgust. If in the first two films, with the help of pressure, tones, sounds, quick movements, fear and atmosphericity, passion and excitement were achieved, then in Fincher’s film there are only vile scenes with massacre and blood, with which he tries to achieve fear and tension. Don't get me wrong, I'm not afraid of blood or disembowelment. The problem is that these scenes are unfounded and unjustified in their abomination, and this is the simplest and lazy way to show off the horror genre. Well, seriously. Why build the plot, construction and sequence of the frame and scene, transitions from one episode to another, demonstrations of a clever, calculating and elegant monster in the dark, watching the characters, and whose actions cannot be predicted? It is easier to show blood and flying intestines at once! Okay, if this is like the final scene of the fight, where the detailed and spectacular wounds and bloodshed, on the contrary, can be cool and appropriate to show - but not the whole damn movie, already dull and with poor camera work and thick editing.
Here’s why I didn’t like the movie:
1. Different designs and visuals (yes, and Cameron, then, wasted over meticulously recreating identical designs from the first film in the name of the integrity of the universe and respect). And Fincher’s film seems to be from a different universe, both in terms of appearance and the plot itself.
2. Different color palette. The first two films were in muted cold gray-blue tones. Stylish, mysterious, gloomy and pleasant to the eye. In Fincher’s film, there are always nasty yellow, orange and brown colors (as if they were waste products).
3. Cruelty for the sake of cruelty and display.
4. Frankly sucked from the finger plot, very freely and spat on the events and features of previous films.
5. Selected contradictory setting and mood of the film, as well as the lack of space and futurism. It would seem that the distant future, science, starships, sophisticated weapons and decoration of premises, which was in the first two films. All this goes to the furnace in favor of the moronic presence of dirty prisons of the Middle Ages, passivity and the moronic presence of religiosity with thoughts about the apocalypse, which just raged here (is it post-apocalyptic or a fantastic horror fighter?!). However, Ridley Scott in his Prometheus and Testament on these fronts jumped the shark even further in terms of the idiocy of what is happening.
6. Ending. Okay, let me explain. The problem is not only hardened and sucked out of the finger, but also in this – what is the point of watching some franchises with epicity and overcoming difficulties and dangers, if in the end the main and (especially) beloved character still scrapes? It's all in vain. The laziest attempt to put a point, and so set in previous films.
The film has a couple of beautiful musical themes and entertaining ideas, it’s interesting to parse the story of its creation, but the final film itself is overwhelmingly bad. It's not an Alien and Ripley movie. These two are just cameos and sets in a prison drama. Nothing more.
That's what really didn't need to be continued. A good ending to the second film was closed, but when David Fincher took up the sequel, he changed some details. Once again, Ellen Ripley is cryogenic in a dream, she is again found by strangers, again she is in a panic trying to save the people. This time, the cosmos brings her to an intergalactic prison, where the most notorious are imprisoned, and the notorious are imprisoned (a scum under Tarantino). In prison, religion rules everyone, because it is understandable that when prisoners have nothing more to give, they turn to spiritual prosperity for help, because only the Word of God can heal them and guide them on the right path. And now imagine that in a closed place, where more than a hundred men who live according to the covenant, gets a woman. Here the commandments meet the instincts, and this movie would have turned out well. That is, not to take into account the sequel to Alien, not to attribute a weak film to the general theme, but to shoot as a separate, independent project, would be cool. But we have, unfortunately, a film about xenomorphs. As befits one such guest turns out to be a tenacious bastard and begins to hunt for everything that breathes. Unfortunately, the pleasant ending of the second film is destroyed in some 15 minutes of the third part, Sigourney Weaver is shaved on his bald head and allowed to solve problems with prison staff, and with prisoners, and with a xenomorph. In such a cacophony, most of the picture takes place, we recognize the good people and the most disgusting (and this is among the prisoners, ha), but at the end the plot is pleasantly surprising.
It was necessary to somehow rehabilitate for unnecessary shooting and somehow keep the audience, not to attract the attention of critics – the writers managed to perfectly beat the case with the help of Ripley and xenomorph. And the rest of the people in the picture are meat for the alien, entertainment on the screen, in order to beat coins and add more bread and spectacles. It seems like the finale is closed again, maybe enough? But no, there's 4 movies ahead. Oh, we have to finish the saga. If you removed all the signs of someone else, the movie would have been cool. In addition, Charles Dance (Tiwin Lannister from Game of Thrones) lit up here, which was pleasantly surprising. Ripley! From Alien 3, Wilson's joke has now paid off.
“Alien 3” is a dark, scary film, complex in emotional perception. However, the continuation of the famous story performed by David Fincher can be attributed to those rare cases when the film “not for everyone” captures the spirit of high art and depth of atmosphere. Fincher is a very big original (in a good way). No matter what movie he makes, it is always remembered. One of the most attractive aspects of his film work is the deep, mesmerizing production of dialogue. “Alien 3” is an amazing example of this!
The actors are fine. Especially cut into the consciousness of the magnificent Charles Dance, sensitively played the role of the doctor “with the past”.
Giger himself worked on the design of the new monster. This time, the monster is not born in a person, but in an animal, so it moves differently. In the expanded version of the film Alien appears from the dog, this version looks more stylish.
The fascinating music of Elliot Goldenthal enhances the perception of the picture. Especially spectacularly sounded the chase of the Alien for victims, the death of the monster and the finale of the picture.
The third film from the heroine Sigourney Weaver can not lag behind. Then she was on the alien planet, because of some strange signal ("Alien"), then she was sent back to the same planet to destroy the xenomorphs ( "Aliens"), or she just crashes on the prison planet, where the alien will also take place ( "Alien 3"). But since she fell on a planet where only men are serving time, she must act according to their laws, and wait for the company to come after her.
I didn’t quite understand how an alien could end up on the planet, but then I came to a certain conclusion. I really wanted the authors to explain it in the film. But overall, the battle for survival with him was interesting. No mothers, no cocoons or eggs, just one alien trying to survive on another planet.
In addition, some prisoners have become overly devout, and I believe that it has come, and they will all go to heaven. But even these words do not stop them from fighting for survival. And the end may surprise you.
Sigourney Weaver, who has a shorter and shorter haircut with each new part, pleased with her appearance at that time in the trilogy, and further revealed her character. And the company she made two Charles — S. Dutton and Dance. The first was the head of the pious convicts, and the second doctor in this prison. With each of them, Ripley will have his own story, and these characters will really attract attention.
In this film, the graphics were used more strongly and more often than in previous films, but it was not at such a good level. But it's not too scary. But the camera work is worth commending, because, as moving someone else's eyes, it was very interesting to see. I also liked the picture, along with the last one, so it’s worth watching.
The third Alien film turned out to be unique, completely unlike its two successful predecessors. This film by David Fincher was the most special of all his works.
I am not going to praise this picture, because I did not like everything here. The film is more like a kind of dystopia, in which there is one planet-prison, where there are only prisoners serving their sentences in varying degrees of guilt. When there is a real threat to life, only then all these people of different nature, hardly find contact with each other, but still try together, led by Ellen Ripley, to confront a terrible monster.
Features. The action in the film is not very noticeable. The tape is more saturated with shades of psychological tension on the part of the main characters, because the main characters do not particularly trust each other and someone of them is trying to implement their insidious goals against the background of a common threat.
The xenomorph presented in the picture turned out to be overly computerized, and in movements it was not particularly surprising. The constant corral of the monster from one compartment of the room to another, came out not bad.
“Alien 3” is a horror film, which already clearly traces the elements of the thriller, where the events are fraught with unpredictability, where the ending looks very unexpected. I have no claims to the creators, they tried to make the film so that it was not similar to previous works, and to some extent it was successful.
The most dangerous criminals of the Earth against the most ruthless creature of the Cosmos
- What should we do now?
- Improvise." (c)
After James Cameron filmed the sequel, which had already become a modern classic of Ridley Scott’s Alien, it became obvious that the potential of the project had not yet dried up. However, it was not clear in what way to continue the development of the plot. It seems that the screenwriters of the film Larry Ferguson, David Gayler and Gordon Carroll decided exactly the same as the characters of the film in the prologue quote. What else could they do? Neither Scott nor Cameron wanted to return to the project, apparently believing that everything about the world of “aliens” had already been said. Therefore, the producers of the franchise had to continue experimenting with the author’s vision of the film – to hire a new director. He suddenly turned out to be a young (at that time he was not even 30 years old!) director of commercials - David Fincher, formerly an apprentice on the set of the second and third "Star Wars" Lucas. For a young and uneducated person, such a project is just a gift of fate. Of course, the new director understood that after the commercial failure of such a high-profile film, he was unlikely to find a job in Hollywood. Therefore, he applied the maximum of imagination and creativity to impress the viewer with the third “Alien”, which assigned a strange “third degree squared” in the very title of the tape. This alone could intrigue a fan of this series. However, the director went further, and shot the whole picture in his, as it was later possible to understand - favorite gloomy - depressive style.
In the year of release, the film was ambiguously accepted by the public, and film critics spoke coolly about it. But despite everything, the box office failure of “Alien – 3” was not: in general, having earned more than $ 160 million at the global box office, with a $50 million budget. Of course, even with inflation in mind, that wasn’t the outcome the producers were hoping for. As we remember, previous films earned $100 million and $130 million at a much more modest cost of $11 million and $18 million, respectively. However, Fincher’s debut film did not become a failure, as the young director managed to avoid repetitions of the finds and manner of narration of his predecessors. This brought something new to the trilogy. The atmosphere became psychedelic and pessimistic. The hope of salvation that had been present in the heroes before was replaced this time by the realization of the inevitable demise. It was only possible to decide how you would perish, either by huddled cowardly into a corner, waiting for the evil creature to find you, or by giving it one last battle, thereby gaining some redemption. For the first time since the first film, religion has been mentioned. It serves in some ways as a deterrent to certain characters who are overwhelmed by the craving for violence. A lot of blood and cynicism, in the manner characteristic of Fncher. I can't say it ruined the franchise. After all, as we know today, contrary to all claims, “Alien – 3” was not the final of the franchise. Years later, another sequel appeared (even more controversial than Fincher’s film), and after this series it was decided to cross with films about the alien Hunter, so there was a stupid blockbuster Paul W. S. Anderson “Alien vs Predator”, and then several of its faded sequels. And now, after almost 40 years, Ridley Scott himself decided to return to the project, who recently released an abstruse science fiction, action-packed picture “Prometheus” – presented by him as a free prequel to the very first tape of the 79th. Now here is expected his “Alien: Covenant”, promised to the audience next summer.
As we remember from the plot of “Aliens” – Helen Ripley, along with Corporal Hicks and a little girl, was able to fly from an exploded planet on which there was a colony of “aliens”. The plot of the third film is a direct continuation of that story. In flight, the space shuttle crashes and falls on a small planet, which is a former prison with especially dangerous prisoners. Now there is a kind of labor commune, the members of which voluntarily agreed to stay here in order not to return to the world of people, where they will have the former temptations to crime and violence. The Zekis call themselves brothers and profess the Christian religion, which does not prevent them from yelling at Lieutenant Ripley. When she regains consciousness, she learns from a local doctor that both of her companions died in the accident. The heroine begins to suspect that not one has arrived on this planet, and soon these fears are confirmed - one of the "brothers" is found cut into pieces. There was a reputed accident and he was dragged into a large fan while cleaning in a ventilation shaft. However, Ripley has an opinion on this, which at first she did not intend to share with anyone. But, the situation develops in such a way that in order to survive, all those on the territory of the prison will have to join forces.
The director saved the terrible truth about the heroine until the final, which I will not talk about, so as not to spoil the viewing for those viewers who could not watch the picture. The atmosphere is heavy, which not everyone will like, but it is quite in the style of Fincher, and if you have seen any of his works before, you can get an idea of what awaits you in the third Alien. The new director invited a new operator and composer to create a picture. They were Alex Thompson and Elliot Goldenthal. The first again began to shoot on large-format film, selecting and building compositions of frames in such a way that it would indirectly affect the psyche of the viewer. The second one composed an alarming and depressing soundtrack, which seems to envelop the entire atmosphere of the picture, playing on a depressive perception of the plot. Among the performers, besides Sigourney Weaver herself (who continued to develop the character of her heroine), there were no star performers. However, work in Alien 3 helped attract the attention of such actors as Charles S. Dutton, Paul McGann and Holt McCallani. Charles Dance also played a bright, not quite typical role for himself. It was nice to see Lens Henrickson again on the screen, who again played the role of android Bishop. An extremely unusual continuation of the cult series of fantastic thrillers that has gained its fans over the years. Today, when David Fncher is a recognized film director, the owner of many prestigious awards and awards, the question of whether to watch Alien 3 is not even discussed.
The movie is really awesome. Not like the first two, of course, but still. The scene with the Alien coming out of the bull is just brutal. Killing Dr. Alien is also good - scary and interesting. The alien looks like a lizard here. The tail, the manner of movement and four legs - all like lizards. Here he turned out very huge and healthy. I respect director David Fincher for that. I also like his horror movie Seven. Just like my favorite Jigsaw. Keep going. When the Alien was trapped, I was very happy — I think that’s it — kicked our Alien. Ahn no. The creature got out of the trap and devoured all the jailers. Well, the race along the corridors of the prison is also good - they chased the Alien to glory. And when the thing fell apart, I was just happy. That's the way he should - he won't eat jailers. That's it.
Philosophy in the film as always about God. It's like God has a movie showing us. In fact, I'd like to believe that. The prisoners believed and did well. Anyway, the very pious part came out. Nothing to add.
Bottom line: Alien 3 is a good continuation of the alien adventure. The director did well - well showed us the creature - close-up. That's the most important thing in the movie. That's what the movie takes. And the atmosphere of despair is a scribe. Anyway, the movie came out right. I take one point off for the excessive length of some scenes. It's okay. From me to the movie.
9 out of 10
The film “Alien” is considered a classic of science fiction. The genius of Ridley Scott, the elaborate script, the outstanding acting and, finally, the alien predator itself produced the effect of a bombshell. Of course, such a tasty piece could not remain without continuation. And it followed. “Aliens” are the case when the sequel is not inferior (and in some places and surpasses, what is there) the original. The greedy producers were not going to stop there and after the natural success of the second part, the third was only a matter of time. However, the years passed and the film was still in the project stage. The script was repeatedly rewritten, several people visited the chair of the potential director, even the candidacy of Sigruny Weaver for the main role was in question. But in the end, the studio bosses came to a consensus and work began on the film. The role of director was performed by the then unknown David Fincher. And in general, it is clear why the studio chose his candidacy - the newcomer will not conflict about the vision of the film. The pressure from the producers was so strong that Fincher even refused the final editing - and I must say that I do not blame him for this.
If the first Alien was a horror film, the second was an action movie, then the third clearly claimed the title of a thriller with elements of drama. The scene is a colony for criminals with Jacobs syndrome, where the capsule of the heroes of the second part landed. It is not possible to call the landing soft, since only Lieutenant Ripley survives it. All the further film Ripley walks around the colony, communicates with prisoners, escapes from the monster and pulls the timing in every possible way. This is the continuation of the incorruptible classic.
Helen Ripley, one of the most powerful female images in fiction, is represented in the film by an absolutely uninteresting creature. Once personally defeated the Queen of Aliens, the brave lieutenant became a pathetic reflection of her former self. Space prison does not fit into its own universe, just as its inhabitants. The stranger himself (in the film he is only one) can be successfully replaced by a vampire, a werewolf, a virus, a maniac - in short, anything. It is only a decoration, an unloaded gun. Perhaps that is why such squalid effects were used to draw it - in scenes with a green screen, the monster looks and moves so implausibly that you want to punch your face with your palm. This is despite the fact that in the “live” scenes he looks quite impressive. Alien 3 is torn apart by internal demons: he tries to be a continuation of the series and at the same time radically different from previous films. That's his main problem. The film completely lacks the color and spirit of the series. It feels like the script was originally written for a completely different movie, but it suddenly added Alien, Ripley and index 3 in the title. Fincher wanted to make a drama about people and faith, about the feeling of emptiness and the inevitability of death, and the studio wanted a continuation of the acclaimed franchise. In the end, neither of them worked.
But to be fair, the movie has its advantages. The acting game is quite strong, as well as a good soundtrack. And perhaps the biggest plus of the film is that it gave Daphide Fincher the way to Hollywood.
So what's the bottom line? As a result, there is a film that spits on its own origins, ugly treats the characters of past parts and is generally quite incoherent.
6 out of 10
Who is she? Do we know her? An evil guardian angel with a cruel sense of humor became her only companion on this path of horror, sorrow, hatred and despair. He led her to the abode of a nightmare, and all her friends died in the mouth of the devil’s offspring, born of the perverted fantasy of Satan himself. He left her alone in the cold void among the stars and woke her up to mourn his child, who had grown old waiting for her mother. You think he let her go after that? No, he lured her to hell. She and a group of brave soldiers were thrown into the bloodbath of hell, where they were tormented and devoured by the children of the abyss. He gave her hope, he allowed her to think that she could save someone’s life, not her own, but that unfortunate girl found in the far corner of the underworld. A cruel angel with broken wings, he lied to her, he laughed at her. He promised her peace and peace and promised to be a mother again. But I took everything. He made her desperate. He brought fallen souls to the shelter. He made her angry. Her name is Ripley...
Rage-161. Here, in the steel-chained bulkhead complex of the former colony prison, among the soulless mechanisms resting in the dust, Lieutenant Ripley’s path ends. At the local morgue, she will cry silently over the body of baby Newt, feeling her own desire to live drop by drop into a black hole formed in the place of the soul. In this place, she will experience despair, one last fragile feeling of intimacy before again plunged into the river of bloody terror into which her life has turned after meeting strangers. In these roaring corridors, gnawed by darkness, her earthly affairs are completed. But on this day she will not humbly kneel, waiting for the creature from the abyss to tear her apart. That day she will fight.
The transformation of the Alien began even before the last viewer was tired of admiring the fierce battle of Cameron’s paratroopers with hordes of xenomorphs, but the search for an idea, a plot and a director for the final chord dragged on for years. On the second round of production hell, Giger’s creation was sung on the chest by gifted screenwriter Vincent Ward. His unchained mind created a world that could surprise the most sophisticated fans of science fiction. In its grandiose cosmic ark, glorifying the wooden Gothic of the Middle Ages, the alienated inhabitants of the male monastery lived, worked and died with prayer on their lips. Turned heart to God, and body to work, the monks were not ready to invade their closed world of a sinful woman and her diabolical companion, devouring flesh with faith. They had to despair, then cast off humility and burn in the fire of battle, but this did not happen. The fight against the windmill idiocy of studio bosses did not end in Ward's favor. The detailed world collapsed like Rome under barbarians.
On the ruins of medieval scenery began the third act of an unfunny play. With God’s help, the monastery became an abandoned prison, and the monks became prisoners left to themselves. In addition, the money had already been spent, people were hired and deadlines were agreed, so the studio hired a man to repair the broken toy, who had to unconditionally follow the general line. For a newcomer to big Hollywood, it was a chance to prove himself, and enthusiastic young genius David Fincher dived into the production swamp with pioneering enthusiasm. From where, after a few months of heavy shooting and incessant pressure, he emerged from above an aged, angry neurosthenic who had forgotten about sleep and a sense of humor. And yet he would not be himself if he did not bring something new to this initially commercial project, at the same time worthy of the brilliant works of Scott and Cameron, and at the same time uniquely personal.
His painting acquired the coldest shades, only occasionally illuminated by blinding flashes of furious flames. It became more alarming, the corridors filled with thick shadows, sometimes coming to life to attack. Even brightly lit rooms of the dining room and medical bay showed cold functionality. This place does not give life, Fincher insisted, it only takes it away.
In these gloomy scenery, the characters acquired genuine depth. Ripley's changed. Having lost all hope, she plunged headlong into the quagmire of sorrow and despair. Only the return of the demon, almost a family member, awakened her previous resolve. Images of other characters - whether the prison chief or the doctor, the local preacher or the last madman - bright colors fit into the morose canvas of the thriller, elevating it to the level of psychological drama. The cast, from economy almost completely recruited from the stage of British theaters, became perhaps the main advantage of the tape.
Alas, under the pressure of the studio, Fincher had to put under the knife a number of significant scenes, deeper revealing his plan. Only eleven years later, the master was repaid. Collected from dusty pieces of mosaic in oblivion formed into a whole, emotionally tense, full of drama and viscous atmosphere of the canvas. Smart people, including critics, once said that the third series of the cycle could be a masterpiece, if it were not about Ripley and Aliens. They were right. But they were wrong.
The story told by Fincher is a tale of lost souls, forgotten and unnecessary people who find their way to God. This is the story of how they died fighting the devil with their bare hands, atonement for the sins of a past life. It's about a woman who's gone through all sorts of nightmares that couldn't break her spirit. And about the monster reborn again and again to pursue her. This is a story about saving humanity, about self-sacrifice for the lives of the innocent. These are the moments that make it great.
Alien 3 was the most problematic xenomorph movie, except Aliens vs. Predator: The requiem was so bad that it even surpassed the terrible Alien 4: Resurrection back to our film so here we see the editing curve good special effects mixed with disgusting and this is not to mention that the finale of James Cameron was just flushed down the toilet, but still not all so badly disassemble everything in order.
The plot tells us about Ripley who overnight lost all the people dear to her the fact that the rescue capsule where Ripley and Newt were saved with an android from the second part crashed on the planet prison survived only one Ripley and the lycembrane thanks to which a new kind of alien appeared on the planet.
The plot in principle is not bad that such a wonderful finale spoiled, but as they say that what happened is not going to go away, but we get suddenly a beautiful drama and then a rather tense horror case is that the stranger is again alone, and the prisoners have no weapons to confront this monster because of this in the film there is an atmosphere of despair that does not let you come off for a minute.
What can be distinguished from the minuses well, first of all, as I have already said ragged editing in the second computer graphics is terrible somewhere, and sometimes good because of this, it seems that the effects have been saved well and at the end in the third hard finale that not everyone will like.
7 out of 10
David Fincher is a great director. It may even seem like he doesn’t have bad movies, but the only movie he didn’t succeed in is his Alien 3 debut. The third film became harsh, tough, bloody and grimly atmospheric. I didn’t like the movie, I don’t need a third. The second film logically completed the struggle between Ellen Ripley and strangers, and the dilogy itself was fascinating and cult (as it is now). Alien 3 is not fascinating, sagging, empty, illogical, and the script was often rewritten. And David Fincher was constantly fighting and arguing with the producers, who did not give him creative freedom. Fincher was strictly controlled, beaten on the hands not allowing to do something yourself, it was with this that the franchise began to roll down a slope and with each subsequent sequel the films became worse.
The acting game is good, especially well played Sigourney Weaver, you can see that Ripley begins to change now she looks like a man, in the film she even shaved her head. The special effects of the film are good, especially the stranger turned out well. Yes, the film is depressing, but atmospheric, gloomy atmosphere is conveyed perfectly.
This film is completely unsuccessful that even the director Fight Club, The Social Network, The Disappeared, The Mysterious Story of Benjamin Button, could not cope with it, in general the film was shot purely for the income of money. The film is weak, with a viscous narrative, it has a leisurely action and lack of action, but it turned out not bad, it may even appeal to many, but for me it is just an unnecessary continuation.
Perhaps no victory over mutants, monsters and aliens came at such a high price as happened to xenomorphs. Time after time, the brave Lieutenant Ellen Ripley, faced with strangers, lost people close to her and each such loss was like a knife to the heart and even victory over monsters did not bring universal rejoicing, as it led to even more deaths. The first meeting with a stranger ended for Ripley with the death of her friends and shipmates, and the awakening brought another disappointing news - her own daughter died without leaving any heirs. I can't imagine what could be worse than hearing the news that you outlived your son or daughter. No, things can always be worse, and David Fincher has shown that. The fact is that in the second film, Ellen Ripley met a little girl Newt that through the fault of strangers lost her parents, and the heroine Sigourney Weaver swore that by all means will take the girl away from the cursed planet and will do everything possible so that the baby had a happy life. Not in words. It was a silent oath that reflected in Ripley's eyes. Moreover, the heroine Sigourney Weaver met with a man who made the girl’s heart beat more often. This man was named Dwayne Hicks and apparently fell in love with Ellen Ripley. Well, as the "cherry on the cake" was made by android Bishop, who became a loyal friend of Lieutenant Ripley. Here's the third part... it crossed everything!
Ripley’s eyes open convulsively and she sees a white ceiling, yellow walls and a man in a bathrobe, which can be called a doctor with a large stretch. What happened? Have recent events been a bad dream? Did the Sulako and its valiant crew not go to LV-426 and burn out the nest of vile xenomorphs? And wasn't little Newt losing her whole family? Ripley, clutching into the doctor’s hand like a life-saving straw, asks two questions that any normal person would ask in her place, but the heroine Sigourney Weaver is afraid to get answers. And I have to say, she's not afraid of it for nothing. Because Ripley finds himself on a planet-prison, where rapists, murderers and lunatics are serving life sentences on whose account more than a dozen lives have been taken. But here and now these, kham, people have found faith in God and they do not seem to pose a threat. I guess. The second news plunges the brave Lieutenant Ripley into shock - Newt, Hicks and Bishop did not survive the landing of the rescue capsule and died. It's over. The cursed strangers, even being completely destroyed, were able to strike back and for the second time take away from the heroine Sigourney Weaver all who were dear to her. That's just, is all strangers really dead and why acid burns were seen near the rescue capsule?
I love and hate Alien 3 at the same time. I hate him for cutting off the lives of such brilliant characters, whose adventures we followed with a faint heart in the second part of the franchise. I love this film for returning to the dark, oppressive and hopeless atmosphere that reigned in the first film of the franchise, where a cunning, fast and intelligent monster destroys people one by one, but without hesitating to attack a large crowd of people, obviously cautious. At the same time, people without firearms or explosives resort to the help of intelligence and try to make a plan that will allow them to destroy the xenomorph. A kind of war of minds.
In addition to the atmosphere in this film, there is another undeniable virtue - the actors. The heroine of Sigurki Weaver, who for the third time is forced to face a terrible xenomorph, still looks and behaves not like “née Lara Croft” and others like them, but as a person who in an extreme situation behaves with restraint and confidence, even despite the fact that Ripley herself is scared to death. Just someone must look and behave confidently, so that others do not lose those crumbs of faith and hope for a successful outcome that they have left. That Charles Dance's character, who played the doctor, the very man Ripley saw on waking up. Smart, resourceful and insanely human character who has made a terrible mistake in the past, sincerely repents of what he did and tries to make the world a better place by working as a doctor in a colony that is on the edge of the galaxy. Well, or other prisoners, most of whom in any other film would pass for extras, who should die in a strictly allotted period of time, here demonstrate an excellent acting, and thanks to their dialogues, monologues, and sometimes fragmentary movements and manner of behavior, you can get an idea of who this or that character was on a civilian and why he was imprisoned. Maybe it’s not my imagination and desire to see a black cat in a dark room, even if it’s not there. Who knows?
Of course, the film has its flaws. Whether it is that the stranger himself in this part looks not a frightening alien creature that is alien to all living things, but a creature over which evil scientists have put all sorts of experiments and not fed for weeks, his appearance is so exhausted. However, all this can be attributed to the fact that a stranger in this part climbed out of the buffalo. How not? How's that from a dog? Oh, yeah. In a distant childhood, I too saw a theatrical version where there was a dog and where the storyline of prisoner Golick was practically cut. That's it. But as a child, when watching this picture, I had many questions, the answers to which the director’s version was able to give... albeit not for all. And how can you answer all the questions, if the film was passed from hand to hand, and when shooting began, David Fincher was put under such pressure from the producers that he could not withstand nerves and he showed everyone the middle finger left loudly slamming the door. However, who needs to read the article about how Alien 3 was created, and as for those who care about the film itself, I will say that the film turned out stylish, cruel, scary and very dramatic. Yes, not without roughness, but you can safely close your eyes on them, the good of cinema is really worth it.
8 out of 10
P.S. Hmm, Furia 161... Is it a coincidence that the most famous space assassin, Richard B. Riddick, hails from Furia, or is it a good time to expect a crossover movie in the future?
Before her eyes smoked the coarse flesh of a former colleague. The common past—the knot that holds two souls together—was as thin as ever. The emaciated, emaciated remains of a space lifeboat fringed her aching body as she stared at him lying motionless in his grave capsule. If you were not far from the scene, you would see a striking picture - a huge, alien horizon of an alien planet, stretching for hundreds of kilometers, and before it - a wave on the wave - a sea with a predatory metallic shine. And at the very edge of the foreign reservoir, like a miniature fire, in the distance, lurked the dead belly of the crashed shuttle. Its gaping holes hid inside artificial lighting that framed the tilted silhouette. This silhouette belongs to Ellen Ripley - captain of the third rank, all his life fighting monsters. She mourned her fellow wrestler - the artificial man Bishop - in his android cranial box lurked the solutions to her tragedy, it was only necessary to connect an electrical interface cord, turn on the voice transducer of synthetic speech, bring food to Bishop, he, like the biblical Lazarus, will rise from the dead and for the first time in many months of silence will open cosmic silence.
Alien 3. This film has a difficult fate. More than once the script was redrawn, torn and wobbled again. Before David Fincher was allowed to direct, it was intended for three different directors - Rennie Harlin, Vincent Ward, Walter Hill and, of course, the progenitor of the vile epochal monster - director Ridley Scott. It remains only to guess how the triquel would have turned out, if you were at the helm of Scott, but, remembering Prometheus, perhaps, you should not harbor special subjunctive hopes for the history of the film masterpiece. Alien 3 many scold - they say, absurdity, stupidity, hollowness and all that. Personally, I am on the side of those who admire this continuation of the “alien” epic. Nothing can compare with the first part, in this sense, the Alien was partly overtaken by the fate of the Matrix, although Alien 2 can not be written off, but still it is more of a militant than a generator of xenophobic horror and trepidation, as it was in the first part. As for the creation of Fincher, it turned out very good.
Of course, from the first frames, the master’s handwriting is guessed – clearly calibrated strictly-directional geometric shooting, smooth continuous shots, as if leading the viewer through the maze of action. And, of course, the main feature of Fincher is the ability to concisely, with a few strokes (atmospheric lighting, algebraically accurate game of “frightening-catch-up” with the mind of the viewer, etc.) to convey tension and the so-called suspense. The action of the film is as follows: on board the ship “Sulako” lurks xenomorph, which when trying to open the cryocapsule inflicts a wound, the acid of which causes fire on board. Capsules with a crew in hypersleep are transferred by automatic to a lifeboat, which is thrown into the nearby planet Fiorina 161. Only Ripley survives, Rebecca chokes, Hicks is pierced by a detached beam, and Bishop is completely disabled. Ripley is picked up and cared for by prison doctor Clemens, who serves in a special prison colony located on the planet. Warden Harold Andrews disagrees with the woman’s stay in the men’s colony and asks Weyland-Yutani to evacuate her. Meanwhile, an extraterrestrial killer is already infiltrating the sidelines of the prison to play a long-familiar role.
First of all, you can call me too sentimental, but there is a certain one-sidedness and understatement of the romantic story between Ripley and Clemens, which is interrupted too suddenly and ridiculously. I think that spending a lot of timekeeping on the development of the character, the disclosure of his character and personal history, already almost cause deep sympathy, only for this it is absurd to cock him – it is in vain. Definitely, it was worth giving the story a more serious acceleration, giving the viewer even more time to develop empathy and, if you eliminate such a well-developed character, then clearly closer to the finale of the film.
The second disadvantage, but not the importance, is the design of the Alien. It is not as scary as I would like. Such even now on the dating site post, I'm sure you will immediately find lovers of such a brutal alpha male. An alien predator should cause admiration mixed with disgust, not a sense of bewilderment and a desire to feed.
Clear advantages: drama more than covers the above shortcomings. The idea of giving birth to an alien animal from the belly is powerful. Personally, I got to the bone plus the appropriate music and how the fact of the monster's birth was rhymed with the funeral ... no words. Power. Very pleased with the slow but faithful dispersal of events, the gradual and inevitable involvement of the viewer in the process of chasing the “ghost”. Personally, I had no confidence until the last in the outcome of the fight, suspense at a height. Big plus. And, of course, the finale is like a crescendo of history, heated drama, touching the living, memorable. This is the most epic abortion in the history of cinema.
Alien 3 is a worthy film, it should be exactly what Fincher proposed.
8 out of 10
Any filmmaker knows the meaning of the well-known proverb “Strike iron while it is hot”, and when it comes to an insanely successful and popular franchise, the question of continuation is only a matter of time.
Six years after the excellent sequel to James Cameron, the third part about the fight of the fearless Ripley with alien creatures, which was put by no one then unknown, appears on the screens. May the many fans of Fincher forgive me, by the way I am myself, but his debut work turned out to be very weak. Weak not even in comparison with the previous parts, but weak in itself.
The first thing that I noticed when most of the film had already passed, that I almost forgot about what, and most importantly about whom the film itself and only when mentioning someone else, I realized that yes for sure, it’s an Alien! Alien as some character is damn little in this picture, and all his past greatness and horror, which was so diligently created by Ridley Scott and James Cameron, in this part just killed completely. The alien is no longer perceived as the perfect killing machine, he has ceased to instill wild fear in the hearts of the audience. Not only do you not perceive a stranger as before, so he has still lost his combat qualities, so to speak. In a series of boring dialogues and conversations, in the absence of plot development, a stranger occasionally appears to be saturated with human flesh. And if before you waited for every appearance of this monster and wanted to see something epic, now it is boring, crooked and uninteresting filmed. Forays of a stranger into the light are no longer impressive or surprising.
The plot of the picture also stalls on the spot and does not shine with something original. According to the idea, the story of a stranger could be completed after the second part, but we know that the producers will not leave such a tasty piece hanging around and again we know that in such situations, greed will always ruin Fraer. So we end up with neither fish nor meat.
"Alien 3" is a frankly weak continuation of the movie saga about alien monsters and do not need to be a genius to understand that the third part is very sagging compared to the previous parts.
Do not go humbly into the darkness of eternal darkness.
Preface
The Alien franchise, probably like no other, before or after it, was so lucky with the directors. Until then, until then, of course.
And all three (it is a trilogy for me personally is the whole story) once beginning director, shot in the end in this franchise some of the best examples of the genre, in which later finally found themselves.
Ridley Scott shot an adventure film with elements of horror. Exactly what with the elements, because its first part, first of all, is a big and interesting adventure.
James Cameron after a brilliant debut with the first "Terminator", for the first time tried to turn in the genre of action film, which he did with brilliance. However, as in many of his other works, in the second part of the franchise, the genre of the action movie, he skillfully mixed with a lot of other genres.
Finally, David Fincher. This is the beginning of a great director. Masters of psychological thriller and voluminous psychological scenes.
About his third part, my favorite in the cult trilogy, and will be discussed in this review. I’m just talking about the movie version.
Plot
The capsule with the miraculously saved main characters of the second part due to failures in electronics makes an emergency landing on the planet-prison of maximum security, where especially dangerous criminals of all stripes are collected: from rapists and murderers to maniacs. However, there are among these brethren and quite decent people who received the “tower” by the will of fate.
The colony lives in some semblance of a religious community, expiating sins by working in a mine under the management of a kind of mayor in household affairs, and a kind of a holy father in spiritual affairs.
The colonists arrive at the crash site of the capsule, where they find the only survivor – our longtime friend Ripley.
General features
Fincher managed to return to the franchise what Cameron had taken away from her - pristineness and despair. The alien from him and Ridley Scott, as well as the first Terminator of Cameron himself, is a ruthless and merciless killing machine, with which neither agree nor disperse will be possible - only to escape, at the slightest chance of surviving, or, even more so, to defeat the alien creature.
The third “Alien” is primarily a psychological drama.
And, like all Fincher films, the characters here are remembered for a long time. After a recent revision of the trilogy, I found myself thinking that a bunch of convicts empathized much more than a squad of brave space paratroopers or the crew of the Nostromo space barge.
Plus, the Alien himself here acts as, you know, the guise of Satan for sinners, sent by him to atone for sins.
Without weapons, in a confined space, people are faced with a choice: to fight the creature or to die without meekness. Illustrated by Dylan Thomas:
“Do not extinguish yourself by going into the darkness of the night.
Stand up against the darkness that crushed the light of the earth. "
And, in fact, having no chance of success, people still fight against Death.
Result
The long, painful gestation of the script, the various difficulties of the shooting process, Fincher’s disagreements with Gyler and Hill, the constant postponement of the end dates of shooting and other household troubles did not benefit the picture.
After the film was released, not everyone liked it. First of all, those who expected something from him in the spirit of the second part. But alas, much to their dismay, the Alien of cannon fodder has again become hiding in the shadows in an inexorable and merciless manner of Evil. An alien creature here again is almost impossible to kill, especially when there is no suitable weapon.
And the mass viewer has always preferred “pee-pee-pee” rather than revealing the characters and the depth of the picture.
The final assessment implies the so-called “extended versions”, which I consider absolute crap, heresy and other bad components. Without which, however, this stunning final part of the great trilogy would not have been born.
8 out of 10
“Alien 3” or as it is called abroad “Alien in the Cube” was born for a long time and in agony. The first film, shot thanks to a fresh concept, original style (thanks Geiger) and competent directing (thanks Ridley Scott). The second film became a masterpiece solely due to the unsurpassed talent of James Cameron.
The third was unlucky with the producers, who did not let the young but extremely talented David Fincher step in. The producers didn’t care about the plot, they had to release the product. It all began with the fact that a number of illiterate decisions led to the loss of colossal sums from the budget of the picture, and when Fincher finally began shooting, he had to work with scraps of several unrelated scripts, rewrite which, had to “on the knee”, right during filming. We had to use the already built scenery, since there was no money for the new ones, and fight against the constant interference of the producers, who did not give Fincher a step.
But let’s try to evaluate the film as it is, and not suffer about how it could turn out. And I will immediately make a reservation: the theatrical version of the film, I will not even consider, since it is a chopped, poorly mounted absurdity. We will talk about a special edition, restored, based on Fincher’s sketches.
After a dynamic, bright and spectacular second film, the "Third Alien" from the very first seconds shocks. Shocked by its atmosphere of doom, deep depression and a very different understanding of inevitable death. And if we abstract from the first two films, Alien 3 is not so bad. It is a tense, dramatic thriller that touches on issues of religion and philosophy, with interesting, wonderfully played characters.
The only thing I personally couldn’t forgive the triquel was the death of survivors in Aliens. The viewer was worried about these characters the whole last film, and then, at the very beginning, he realizes that all this was in vain. You can't do that! You just can't do that! It would be better to just beat so that the rest flew further to the ground, and the capsule with Ripley fell on Fiorina.
It's interesting to see how Ripley has changed. The hysteria is in the past, she is persistent and straightforward, and stubbornly moves towards her goal. Extremely cute turned out Dr. Clemens, played by Charles Dance, especially fascinated by his calm and at the same time steely look, and therefore it is extremely disappointing that his character does not live to the end. Separately, I want to mention the prisoner Golick, played by Paul McGahn (known as the 8th Doctor, from the TV series Doctor Who). Mad fanatic, and almost completely cut from the theatrical version, his character is truly revealed only in the full version of the film.
Eliot Goldenthal's music is something. It is difficult to admit this, but with his large-scale symphonic twists, he managed to surpass even the soundtrack of the late James Horner to the second part.
So if you are ready for a completely different Alien film and are able to abstract from the excitement about the second part, then the third film absolutely deserves your attention. He is not at all like his predecessors, and Fincher did just a colossal job, he had to go through real hell to make a real, deep, authorial film out of nothing.
9 out of 10
The third part of “Alien” I do not like, in my opinion it is weaker compared to “Aliens” and “Aliens”, the third part became darker and duller.
Alien again became one number, and the group of people more, only those do not have weapons and they do not know who they encountered according to the rules of the first film. I didn’t like the beginning of the movie, all the survivors except Ripley died, and Ripley went to a prison planet where she was abused and raped, and the end is pale and unexpressive.
The special effects are good, the stranger himself is well filmed, but in the first and second parts the special effects are cooler. The film is boring and drawn-out, Charles Dance is still there, but his character is uninteresting and merges in the middle of the film, the role of the actors of the film is bad, but except for Sigourney Weaver. I was surprised that the film was directed by one of the great directors David Fincher, he has a lot of good films: “Seven”, “Fight Club”, “Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”, “Game”, “The Mysterious Story of Benjamin Baton”, “Gone”, “Social Network”, “House of Cards” and the film is so bad that a masterpiece director did not save it. So David did not cope with the task that he was offended by the creator of this franchise Ridley Scott, although David Fincher is not to blame, it is the 20th century Fox tried, they wrote the script, and Fincher put the director, in order if the film fails, then everyone will blame the novice director. Fincher was hit on the hands, not allowed to do anything himself.
The film is weak, dark and in my weak franchise.
3 out of 10