
The Film: Alien³ (special edition)
The Principals: Director: David Fincher. Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Charles Dance, Charles S. Dutton, Paul McGann, Brian Glover, the corpse of Carrie Henn.
The Premise: In space, no one can hear you scream, again. After two run-ins with a terrifying species of alien, space officer Lt. Ellen Ripley’s escape shuttle crash lands on the planet Fury 161, a penal colony inhabited by religiously converted convicts. The sole human survivor of the crash, Ripley soon learns that she has brought an unwanted passenger with her, namely one of the xenomorphic aliens she has gone through lengthy trials to destroy. The prison planet of male convicts are ill-equipped to deal with such a creature, and to make matters worse, Ripley discovers that she may have one of the creatures gestating inside of her. Word of this reaches the evil space corporation that has been trying to harvest the aliens as a bio-weapon, and it becomes a race against time for Ripley and the convicts to trap and kill the creature that is on the loose, and to destroy the horrifying monster growing within her.
Is It Good: If you put a gun to my head and asked me if Alien 3 was a good movie, I’d have to say no. On the whole and considering its franchise pedigree, Alien 3 is a disappointment and too full of glaring flaws to qualify it as good. But I would offer a caveat that taken on its own, Alien 3 has merit, and if viewed in the form of the superior “special edition” or “director’s cut” or whatever, a lot of the glaring flaws of the theatrical release are remedied. The film does have its defenders (for some weird reason British people seem to like this sequel over the inarguably superior Aliens), and first time director David Fincher would go on to prove himself as a force to be reckoned with in modern cinema. But none of that can change the fact that this film was a rushed, undercooked yet over handled mess from the get-go, and the finished product reflects that in a deeply flawed effort.
But let’s talk about merit. I tend to be a minority on this one, but I like the basic story and set-up of Alien 3. By killing off the surviving supporting cast of the previous film (including the surrogate daughter, which is really ballsy for a tentpole sequel) the slate is wiped clean and Ripley is put into a real position of pathos. This woman has nothing to lose. Another film of Ripley trying to save Newt from aliens would have been a drag, and plus, they would have had to recast because the original actress had gone through puberty at that point. And Hicks wouldn’t have served much use either. The only reason to have them in this story would be to please the fans, which is never a good reason to do anything. They didn’t need to be here so they were wisely jettisoned. Not only that, but a grisly autopsy is performed on Newt’s corpse, which I find enormously satisfying. This immediately establishes an uncompromising tone for the film which serves to let you know that no one is safe.
Sigourney Weaver is at the top of her game here, and though this isn’t the badass mama performance she was so lauded for in Aliens, she never hits a single false note. Shaved of her curls, Weaver is all tight-lipped anguish; this woman has been through hell, is at the end of her rope, and you can see it in Weaver’s bloodshot eyes. I would argue that it’s her most layered performance in the entire series, and what she is asked to do here in terms of character is meaty and interesting. The rest of the cast are primarily British thespians and they all rise to the challenge, particularly Dance as the haunted prison doctor and if you watch the extended cut, Paul McGann as the unhinged and fanatical Golick. McGann’s character does not get his due in the theatrical cut, and I felt that excising his storyline was a real detriment to the film on release. Golick represents the dark side of the inmates’ fanaticism and has a major role to play in the plot, which makes it all the more puzzling that it was cut. It also gives the film a nice, slow-burn pacing that is more in line with the original Alien, which I think is what Fincher was intending. The theatrical cut has that rushed, uncomfortable pacing that you always get from a movie that has been butchered in the editing room. I think for this reason alone, the extended version is clearly superior.
There are changes in the extended cut, like the alien being birthed from an ox, that are largely superficial, and it’s not to say that all of the film’s problems are solved. The creature itself is still an issue. Alien 3 was made in that awkward time when CGI was just coming into prominence but hadn’t been mastered enough to render convincing creature effects. Because the creature in this film was a quadruped, there were shots that required it to be seen running and climbing walls on all fours, and the effects team came up with a solution that unfortunately doesn’t look good. They used a rod puppet that is comped into shots, and the result is a creature that doesn’t look like it is in the same space as the characters. The lighting is off slightly and the matting is rough; it just looks awkward. To make matters worse, in close-up shots the creature is clearly a man in a suit, which works fine but you can tell it’s not a quadruped and it doesn’t match. Time has not been kind to the puppet effect, and to the untrained modern eye it probably just looks like crummy computer graphics. This could be overlooked as charming if we were talking about a B movie creature feature, but Alien 3 is a big franchise film, and the monster in this one is a poor showing when compared to the clever and sparingly seen creature in the first film, and the mind-blowingly cool alien queen from the second. It’s a flaw that is really hard to get around.
Another problem the film can’t overcome is that there is a real monotony to the design. Fury 161 is a grimy industrial maze, and it’s really hard to discern a sense of geography to the sets. Adding to the problem is the fact that the cast is uniformly shaved bald, which while sensical to the story, serves to make them largely indistinguishable, especially when it comes to the pasty Brits. It’s really difficult to keep track of who is who on first viewing. It’s too bad because everyone’s bringing their a-game in the acting department. The film also has very little levity to offer, and this coupled with the oppressive palate makes for a depressing viewing experience. It’s hard to feel any sense of elation coming out of Alien 3. This would be fine if it worked gangbusters as a horror film, but unfortunately it doesn’t. Alien 3 can’t conjure up any fear or dread better than Ridley Scott’s masterful original, so ultimately Fincher’s film is left feeling redundant. If it can’t scare or excite you more than the previous outings, what use is it? Other than what it chooses for Ripley’s fate in the end, this sequel is mostly an exercise in been there, done that. To add insult to injury, the climax of the film is remarkably similar to the climax of Terminator 2, which beat this film to cinemas by a year and was a huge success that was seen by pretty much everyone. So yeah, redundant.
But there’s no point in revisiting flawed films to reaffirm what you didn’t like about them, and if you are a fan of the Alien franchise and you’d like to revisit this film, I think you’ll find some stuff to enjoy, especially in the extended cut. It’s important to note that I watched the recent Blu Ray release, and not only does the transfer look great, but they cleaned up the previously unfinished sound mix of the DVD release. You would swear you were watching a fully completed director’s cut from 1992. They even got actors back to loop dialogue. It’s a really great cut of the film and in my opinion should be considered the definitive version of Alien 3. So while I don’t think that it is a great or perhaps even good film, I do recommend that you watch the extended cut on Blu Ray and decide for yourself. Throw this one on the pile for your David Fincher film fest as you gear up for his version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, or as you eagerly await Ridley Scott’s Alien prequel Prometheus.
Random Anecdotes: The film was original conceived as a wooden planet occupied by space monks! I would have liked to have seen them pull that crazy idea off.
Cinematic Soulmates: Alien, Aliens, Alien Resurrection, Alien vs. Predator, all of the other movies inspired by the original Alien. Not Alien vs. Predator Requiem though. That film has no soulmates, cinematic or otherwise.





18 comments
No mention of Elliot Goldenthal’s awesome score? Or the appearance of the revived Bishop? That was one of the best scenes! Good job though. I love the first 3 Alien films and I am a rabid defender of the 3rd one.
Agreed, Goldenthal’s score is great. Not enough Bishop in the film for my liking though, he’s my favorite character from Aliens.
It has its own merits and the many failings came (mostly) from a nightmarish production, but the awful choice of getting rid of Hicks and Newt’s characters remains my main reason for hating this film.
Ward’s wooden, monk inhabited planet concept and general outline was pretty great, I must agree with you there.
As a staunch defender of the third film’s special edition, I think this is a very solid perspective on why it doesn’t work. The awkward rod puppet is featured only momentarily, so I’ve always been able to forgive the film for that. I do have to say also that this is a far more suitable sequel to the original Alien than the second film ever could be. It doesn’t cheapen the horrible monster and reduce it to mere cannon fodder, and quite honestly the inmates have always been more interesting characters than the heavily cliched space marines that speak like creations pulled from a ten year old’s trapper keeper. This movie also has two really redeeming features you didn’t mention: Morse’s hilarious and impeccably timed, “FUCK!” and Dillon’s fistfight with The Beast.
count me as a Brit that prefers it to Aliens. I think a lot of that for me has to be with making it a bad ass again by taking away the guns. Plus I loved the POV stuff when I saw it in the cinema.
that is possibly me favourite use of the word “fuck” in movie history 🙂
Well, I saw this one in the movie theater (I was excited, since I’ve only seen the two first on VHS) and from the minute I found out that Hicks and Newt were dead, I hated the movie. Years later, I decided to give the movie another chance, and rented the DVD. and guess what? IT EVES WORST then I’ve remember. There are a LOT of wrong things with Alien 3, but killing those two was a big Fuck You to all the fans of Aliens. They could give any other explanation that kept them alive. You want to make a movie in a boring prison planet? Great, they could start the movie with the rescue of Ripley,Hicks and Newt… and then sending Ripley to the prison for some reason (she blew an entire planet, I guess.) I had the hope that the rumors of Joss Whedon script were true. Were it stars showing that the entire Aliens 3 was just a bad dream from ripley while in deep-freeze sleep
Ripley blew an entire planet? Mayhaps I will seek out this director’s cut anon.
My biggest problem in the film, is “name the supporting cast”….
Go through Alien and Aliens, I bet most fans can name most, if not all the supporting characters.
Alien, you have Dallas, Ash, Cain, Lambert, Parker, Brett and Ripley.
Aliens, you have Apone, Burke, Vasquez, Drake, Gormon, Hicks, Hudson, Newt, Bishop, etc… these are all character I can name from memory. I could give you character descriptions of each, that doesn’t rely on their physical appearance.
Alien 3 has none of that. You have Clemens, 88, Dillion… Morse I think….and besides Clemens, no other character is has any explanation… any character building scenes. They turn into the basic “body count” cast that you would see in a lesser horror film, like a Friday the 13th sequel.
While I respect what they were trying to go with in this film, the “religous: imagery and subtext… it was not pulled off. There are too many plot holes as well, from the alien egg origin mystery, to the “now there’s two facehuggers?”twist. It’s just a bad film. I was fully expecting Bishop to be behind the eggs “appearance” and it would have made somewhat sense, given Ash’s intentions in the first film, and Ripley being right about Bishop from Aliens… missed chance.
The best option for Alien 3, would have been a stand alone film. The series is called Alien, not Ripley. Her story was done, tied off with a nice bow. They could have explored more aspects of the alien with a different set of characters, and even went back further to the explanation of the direlect ship.
That’s something that the extended cut somewhat remedies imo, in that it gives you more time with particular supporting characters, completing arcs that were set up in the theatrical but never paid off (particularly with Golic and Junior). I’ve never really had a problem with the characters since I’m a Brit and was raised with the majority of these actors on our television screens. It is certainly a flawed film, especially considering the plot holes in the opening sequence alone, but I’ve always been fond of it’s brutal qualities, the look, sound and atmosphere (something which is too doomy for some). It also appealed to me on the basis that I’ve always been more of a fan of Alien than Aliens and so I felt at home with Alien 3’s quieter moments. Unfortunately one major obstacle the film simply never overcomes, and maybe it’s because I’ve simply seen it too many time, but it simply isn’t scary.
I love it, but I recognise it is flawed and not a patch on the quality of the first two films… but also nowhere near the level of dire that is the series following (Resurrection to Requiem).
Great, insightful column. Kudos!
I agree it would have been difficult to have Hicks and Newt in a sequel that made good use of them. But I do think it is important to please the fans – it’s not like Alien and Aliens had a niche group of fans. But like the poster above said, killing them off was a big “fuck you” to the fans. It would’ve been better to come up with a scenario that removed Hicks and Newt (but kept them alive) and Ripley was brought back into the foray.
Nice examination of a flawed, yet overhated, movie. For me, Alien 3 will always be the movie that introduced me to David Fincher and got me to watch Fight Club in theaters.
The Mince hits what I think is one of the most salient points: tonally, Alien 3 is the sequel to Alien. It feels like it’s really in that same grimy universe, and it generally moves at the same pace. Looking back at Alien, the joy for me is not the “scary” parts (which also aren’t so scary after long exposure)… it’s in watching the actors inhabit their characters – for instance, watching all the masterful little tics and hints that Ian Holm delivers.
I was never one of those people who were cross at Alien 3 for not being Aliens. We already have Aliens – why do the same thing again? Most definitely, the alien itself is rarely convincing (although I think the infirmary scene is pretty hot). However, I didn’t think Aliens had particularly convincing aliens either, aside from the queen. At any rate, I’m a fan of Alien 3 for the characters, the performances, which I could watch all day. Clemens, Andrews, Dillon, 85, Morse… they’re so interesting to me, and they’re not clichés. Even the bit players make the most of their small moments. The score, as mentioned, is fantastic.
This thing is intentionally the polar opposite of Aliens, and I’m always willing to fully embrace that. I love the film for having the guts to kill all the characters from Aliens, even the franchise’s main character. I love the film for having a very unhappy ending. For all it’s flaws, I watch this one more than Aliens (I certainly quote it more). It’s ugly, brutal and adult – everything Hollywood usually isn’t.
You’re basically saying, “I love this film for it’s strengths and choose to ignore it’s many flaws.” To say that ALIEN isn’t scary after multiple viewing is absurd. NOTHING is scary if you watch it a million times. ALIEN is a movie that is famous for scaring the piss out of people. It is widely regarded as one of the scariest movies of all time. ALIEN 3 is not. You’re right, ALIEN 3 isn’t trying to be ALIENS, its trying to be ALIEN. And it pretty much fails.
Well, that wasn’t quite what I meant… I guess I didn’t explain myself well. Nearly every film has flaws, obviously, and I wasn’t saying that I choose to ignore the ones in Alien 3 so much as that they simply don’t bother me that much to begin with. Collectively, they don’t add up to enough to impact my overall enjoyment of the film. This was true even on the first viewing of the theatrical cut – I was immediately fascinated by the film and how it chose to upend the direction of the franchise.
Certain things that really bother a lot of people about the film – the killing of all the Aliens characters, the visual similarity of the large cast – never phased me (unlike NickP above, I can name a lot of the supporting characters, and describe their characters without relying on physical appearance). I just don’t consider those “flaws”. In the end, I’d really rather, say, watch Ralph Brown’s combination of servility and unease in the office scene than hear Carrie Henn scream again. Personal tastes…
TheMince raised the point about repeated viewings diluting scariness, and I was just commenting that Alien still has so much to offer long after the famed scariness has inevitably worn down. You’re right that Alien 3 isn’t particularly scary to begin with, but I never got the idea that it was really trying to be. It seems more concerned with character and mood than terror anyway, and I’m fine with that (although as I mentioned before, it does have a few moments – Ripley against the wall with the alien at her neck is arguably one of the iconic moments of the franchise).
I don’t think Alien 3 is trying to be Alien, but I do think it wants to follow on from Alien in pacing and texture – and personally I feel it succeeds in that. I’m willing to let it be it’s own film from there.
as superior to the theatrical cut as the extended version is, i still would have liked to see a directors cut from Fincher. i know for a fact that he was not pleased with them changing the birthing animal from an dog to an ox, anyone else know what he did/did’nt like with the final extended version?
Much like Ghostbusters 2, this movie fucks itself right from the get-go. All that work to save Hicks and Newt, right out the window. If Fincher wanted to go back to the more straight-up horror of Alien, I think he should’ve just left Ripley out of it. She had her catharsis with her second encounter with the aliens and was now going to start a family anew. Just leave the poor bitch alone. But no, immediately she has her life torn to shreds AGAIN, and has to do battle with another fucking alien on a planet inhabited by surly male prison inmates. Oh joy. Sure, some of the characters have redeeming qualities, but really, who gives a shit? The desolate planet is ugly. The scale of the film is microscopic. Why should we care if these characters die? And the movie is pretty much devoid of suspense: Guy walks around a spooky dark tunnel alone. He steps in something. He touches it with his hand. It’s alien slime! He turns around. It’s the alien! SPLAT! He’s dead. Repeat. The movie is just painfully depressing and utterly pointless.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.