My review of Alien 3

Well then, this marks the second time James Cameron has made an absolutely stunning film that everyone likes, ties up the ending nicely so there shouldn't be a third one and whoops, there is. The first time was Terminator 2. Now I must give this film some leniency simply because the director was brought in late, had to shoot with no definite script and he had to endure a lot of creative interference from the studio. so the film could have been excellent. Unfortunately for both Mr. Fincher and Alien 3, I don't review in could haves and what ifs.

Acting/Characters: Ripley is still Ripley but I dunno, I feel that something is missing from the character. Something that made her likable and that made you want to root for her is a little diminished. She still has the same motive: kill the Aliens, but I dunno. Something's off. I liked Charles Dance as Clemens and Charles S. Dutton as Dillon and those were the only two supporting characters that I liked. The rest were the same as the other films. Not that you really ever saw them until they got killed. You did have the typical "Aliens aren't here" retard bureaucrats. 4.5/10

Plot: Now this got interesting at points I must admit. Kinda the same as the original alien film. Not as brilliant though. It did add a new twist to the Alien creatures which I liked a lot. so I would say that this aspect was easily the strongest one of the film. Still not amazing. There were some really cool scenes like Ripley and Alien close up. I liked that. Strongest point of the film. Not amazing but decent. 6.5/10

Screenplay: eeh. You look at the screenplays of the first two and this one pales in comparison. There were some good lines and it wasn't as god awful as the 4th one. (but that came later) It was just in the middle. Nothing amazing pretty light on the cringe worthy stuff. Nothing at all special. 5/10

Likableness: There were some really cool parts. And I must admit, they added a new twist to the Alien. Now, I will say that I'm not sure how the whole thing got started. They never explained really how the movie got started. It's hard to explain without giving away plot details but The Alien seems to just...appear. Or at least the Facehugger does. They never really explain how it got there. They explain that there was one but not how it got there. It was overall a weak entry. Not as horrible as 4 not nearly as amazing as 1 and 2. It was kinda entertaining though. 5.5/10

Final Score: 21.5/40 53% (M)


TRIVIA TIME: 1. First-time director David Fincher disowned the film, citing constant studio interference and actually walked out of production before editing began.

2. One early draft of the script focused almost entirely on Hicks, Bishop and Newt, played in Aliens (1986) by Michael Biehn, Lance Henriksen and Carrie Henn respectively. The story would tie up loose ends from the preceding film with Newt returning to Earth to live with her grandparents, as well as Hicks and Bishop and a new team of Colonial Marines battling a rival faction of planets who use the Alien as a bio-weapon.

3. Because an early storyline of the movie involved aliens landing on Earth, an early trailer of the movie had the tagline "On Earth, everyone can hear you scream."

4. $7 million had been spent on sets that were never used thanks to the ever-changing script before filming had even started.

5. At one point, David Fincher was denied permission by the film's producers to shoot a crucial scene in the prison understructure between Ripley and the alien. Against orders, Fincher grabbed Sigourney Weaver, a camera and shot the scene anyway. This scene appears in the final cut.

6. With the release of the definitive Alien Quadrilogy on DVD in 2004, 20th Century Fox proffered David Fincher the proverbial olive branch and asked him to assemble and comment on his own Director's Cut. Fincher declined. He was the only one of the four Alien directors to refuse to have anything to do with the project.

What other picture can I put?