Added: 1 year ago
From: hithisisderek237
Views: 95,964
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (271)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Even as an incomplete movie Alien3 is my favorite. The Assembly cut is great, but I still want Fincher's stamp of approval on it. Hopefully one day Fincher will get the chance to tell the story he wanted.

  • Kill herself? When the Alien comes out...you die!This movie sucks. I love Charles Dutton and Sigourney Weaver as Ellen Ripley! I don't know if she is a great actress or not, but in the Alien series, she made it real. No one can replace her. A reboot would be stupid. Alien 1 and 2 are classic. Aliens 2 was better than Alen 1. Alien 4 is just ok but better than Alien 3. You can skip 3 and would not miss a thing. In Alien 4, everyone, including her clone tells you that Ripley died.

  • @blackonics

    You are too harsh. Only because you hate the movie, doesn't mean others should skip it. By the way, some people refers Alien creature to horror or horror/action atmosphere. Alien 3 has dark atmosphere for sure, while Alien 4 is black comedy, so do some conclusions before saying your thoughts as general opinion. Oh, and if Alien is horror movie and not sci-fi action movie, doesn't mean it's worse than second one.

  • Hey Derek you should do a video on some of the alternate Alien 3 scripts.

  • I'm probably beating a dead horse but I'm still ticked off about Hick's and Newt getting killed off screen. It's still hard for me to get past that. James Cameron said killing off his characters was a "slap in the face" and Michael Biehn said not have the chance to play Hicks again was the biggest disappointment in his career. It's not a bad movie, 100 times better than Resurrection and that AvP crap but nowhere near the brilliance of the first 2. If you take it for what it is, it's good.

  • @EmeraldJEM710 I refuse to watch alien 3 because of the death of newt. They ruined to very good and useful characters.

  • Good review. On the cgi front... the fact that it's a rod puppet lends it a certain quality. It's a funny thing - your brain can tell that it's not real, you can detect a weirdest in it, that there's something not quite right. But in a way that makes it more creepy. It's like with the ED 209 from Robocop.. the imperfections from using physical aids complements it's creepiness that modern cgi all to often doesn't.

  • Wow I must thank you for posting an Alien^3 review that doesn't entirely hate on it! Personally I love The entire alien Saga including AvP (AvP-R BARELY makes the cut) and Alien 3 i feel has the most emotional acting of the series, like despite the problems it had the actors and crew gave it there heart to make something watchable. great review.

  • i think in a move like alien you need some canon foder to show how deadly the alien realy is...but killing off newt...that...was just ...sad...

  • i loved the first movie it was a great work of science fiction and it was pretty creepy

    i loved the second one sience it added a lot of great memrebole characters

    i loved the the third it it was a great and sad film and the ending when ripley kills herself for all of man kind was just buetiful

    the forth was crap

  • i saw all alien movies before i turned 9 and this one is the one that didnt let me sleep

  • @ROLNIKxPL

    thats right!!! me to...

  • And the series was ruined because some dumbass studio head didn't like the idea of Ripley not appearing in the third film and reappearing in a frouth .As a result, we end up with this version of Alien 3, a pile of dog shit. This film sucks and is a bitch slap to all the fans of the first film.

  • It's a runner or dog alien

  • why do so many people hate this movie i like it

  • 17 People Are Prision Inmates and Preys to the Alien

  • Alien 3 is so underrated... the Assembly Cut is the version to watch.

  • how did a alien get on a dogs face thats' just cunfusing i main you can't eggacty put your hand on a dogs' face and rap around its head thats just stupid!!!

  • lol @ serious movie review of a bug movie.

  • Alien 3, sucked balls. and ultimately fucked the franchise. There, I've said it. Revelations had some nice ideas, but everything was so far fetched. Because of Alien 3.

  • @DanCThorpe well have you watched alien resurrection it's not as bad than alien3

  • @DanCThorpe You mean Resurrection.

  • @GoongalaGoongala

    Yes sorry Resurrection. Your quite right.

  • at 1:07 it would make sence that a regular alien had caried the egg and fertelized the ground since when you play alien vs preditor extinction you can see that in the beggining mission as the aliens you just cant carry the egg but you fertiilize the ground

  • this movie focuses too much on characters that you just cant care less about...zzZZzzzz

  • The problem was that Aliens did set the premise totally differently. People expected the story going on but Alien 3 tells actually a totally different story. I personally find Alien 3 a very good movie. I still wish they would make another movie..trying to get back to the first film. Beeing alone in space and facing the unknown menace. I dont liek that they will reveil the heritage of the aliens in Prometheus. The secret behind their origin was one of the scariest aspects of them.

  • great review!

  • kill off all the great characters come on

  • It was really really really really really bad. Biggest problem was that it had nothing to say and nothing to add.

    Ripley had already gone through the full gamut of emotions and the monster had gone through the full gamut of mutations. So what we got was basically a replay of the threat in Alien.

    In my rubbish opinion they should have just left Ripley, Newt, Hicks and Bishop to be happy family at the end of Alien an created some brand new characters. At least they could have created a brand ne

  • @ma049 This movie make the mistake of becoming Ripley focused. The first two always had a strong interesting cast around Ripley..now we are supposed to follow in her melodramatic journey to doom. I think its what drove the nail into the Alien franchise coffin. The star is supposed to be the Alien...

    The biomechanical feel was also getting week in this installment.. it looks like a stupid animal running around...not that much scary about it. Shame they totaly screwed it up but whatever

  • @ma049 From what I understand, the proposed 3rd and 4th films would of put a perfect end note on the series. But of course some studio head nixed it and we ended up with this fucking film. I hate it and try to pretend it doesn't exist and that the series was left hanging with Aliens.

  • I personally think that the movie was good, but James Cameron did a better job with the Alien Franchise. But this is better that Aliens vs Predator and Alien Resurrection ever was.

  • @SuperHorrormovies Probably because of what the film could of been with the original idea/script for a 3rd and 4th film back to back until a studio head nixed the whole thing. Also I think fans feel the killing of Hicks and Newt was an insult, especially the way they met their demise; off-screen. Its also a boring piece of garbage. For me its hard to sit though all the way.

  • Comment removed

  • Finally someone that apreciattes this piece of art! I totally agree with your review, i think it gives this film the admiration it deserves. Despite having a lot of problems, David Fincher did an outstanding work.

  • it was there by a container it was there by that dudee who wanted to kill them all

  • Alien 3 is an excellent movie and what is most memorable about it is the dark overtones that David Fincher does so well in creating

  • copyright breach

  • I don't understand how U say U it doesn't make sense how the egg got on board the Sulaco. Isn't it obvious? When Bishop picked up Ripley & Newt off that ramp, the queen was there. The explosion rocked the ship & hit the ramp giving the queen the opportunity 2 get in2 the ships's landing gear. Once aboard the Sulaco, she reavealed herself by tearing Bishop apart in 2. While in the landing gear, she laid an egg. When the were in hyper sleep, the face hugger emerged & impregnated Ripley...

  • @RalphyDee According to the comic book version, and based on what we can see in the movie this is probably accurate, the facehugger (assuming there was just the one) actually attacked and impregnated Newt first. But when her cryotube flooded the embryo desperately crawled out of her throat and then into Ripleys.

  • @hithisisderek237 Hold on, when the egg opens, it is a facehugger 1st trying 2 empregnate its host. There is no indication that the facehugger attacked Newt. It went str8 4 Ripley. Newt's cryotube was flooded because when the emergency capsule ejected from the Sulaco & headed down 2 the planet, it landed in the water off the shore. The comic book & movies will always differ from each other. Look @ 'The Walking Dead' or any other series. U can't hold a movie 2 what a comic book may say...

  • @RalphyDee lol just wanted to bring up that tidbit which I thought was interesting, not looking to debate...

  • @RalphyDee We are supposed to believe the queen could lay an egg totaly visible for everyone to see attatched to a celing but not noticing. Its bad writing...a cheapshot that we are supposed to swallow.

  • @RalphyDee So she laid an egg while in the landing gear hmmmm... makes sense except a couple of things. RIpley specifically blew up her egg sack during the second movie but sure the queen might have an egg left in her. So how would this lone egg have stuck to anything while Ripley opened up the hatch to send the Queen into space. There is in no way in hell it would have stuck to anything. One top of that it used acid to get into the cyro tube wouldnt this have burned ripley's face.

  • @MultiFuckyou72 Alien DNA! Go figure! Those alien eggs will stick 2 NEthing like crazy glue! Ever seen those crazy glue commercials where the guy applies it 2 his hard hat & won't fall from the building? Same deal here! The acid on the cryo tube? The facehugger did not use acid 2 enter Ripley's tube. It used some form of mutated disappearing pee pee that dissolves on contact without the acid effect thus leaving Ripley without burn marks but leaving a terrible urine smell. Mystery solved... lmao

  • @RalphyDee Also I would like to point out that in every other movie the eggs only opened if they sensed any movement near them. Unless of course the facehugger was already outside the egg. Lastly there was a second facehugger for the dog, because you know those things only can lay one egg before dying. SO since this is the case since it did not attach itself to any one else how did it survive the pod crash , and where the hell did the egg come from.  Just pointing out some stuff.

  • Damn, U got me on that 1. How come I didn't C that? U R right, facehugger 1 impregnated Ripley then died. Where did the 2nd facehugger come from? I guess we R supposed 2 believe there were 2 eggs? Hmmm, well the queen can lay eggs @ will. Makes me think of the movie, 'Critters'. Just when U think they got them all, the movie ends showing that the critters laid a couple of eggs so there would B a part 2 to the series. Who knows? Maybe the queen did the same...

  • @RalphyDee I guess the world will never know lol.

  • I think alien 3 was the best in the serie.

  • i don't really care about the egg, it's just a movie...my thoughts is that the egg was made by the queen and a other facehugger creeped in with the queen... the acting and the suspence were great... and it was the creepiest of them all... the alien could look better on the cgi, but alien, aliens, alien3....for me classics

  • alien 3 was terrible. an interesting premise, crash landing on a prison, ruined by having hicks and newt killed off. It lacked the suspense and horror of the first film and the great action sequences of the second. Just a depressing forgettable film.

  • @Hashpotato The "assembly cut" of Alien 3 is a lot better. It's a more complete story, more coherent, and the Bluray enhanced the picture quality of the original theatrical release. Yes, the story was ultimately a letdown from the previous two films, but as a stand alone film the assembly cut of alien 3 does quite well as a sci-fi/horror film.

  • @Hashpotato I find it better then the fourth Alien film. Oh well everyone has their own opionion.

  • Only ever seen aliens. But the trailer for number 3 it says that the "bitch" is back

  • The movie is not bad but there is a lot of mystery, how those eggs got on the Sulaco.

  • @TomozukiII easy, there was a queen on the ship, she could slowly lay eggs without the hive thing but it would take more time, so only two. That´s my logic.

  • @Crotum

    Well, that is my thought too. Although it seems a bit cheesy since she was always on the drop ship and didn`t have time to do that. Well, there really isn`t any other way since two aliens got out into the emergency shuttle.

  • @acquiredknowledge i love this movie,even thow i have zero critisizen of alien3,i think this review was fair and smart.being that ripley and newt came from fighting aliens,how the egg got there was NOT an issue,who ever takes this as a insult needs to get a life.this movie has no flaws.

  • Watching it on its own terms is certainly the key - its grown on me a lot over time.

  • I hated this movie at first, but after rewatching it many times, it really grew on me and I think it is emotionally the best movie.

  • @megaben99 Perhaps the lack of guns is what not only separates this front the other films, but sets a different, more isolated tone for this movie.

  • i personally don't see any problem about the origins of the facehuggers, the two were laid by the queen inside landing gear of dropship before attacking bishop, the writers just didn't explain that the queen just doesn't need that directional incubator pipe to lay eggs and that sort of throne she was attached to, as the main characteristics of the alien is to adapt to their environement in a way to survive she just laid that two eggs with a queen inside to ensure survival of the specie

  • @carig121 two? but there is only one egg

  • @paulozerati well, there is one egg for the facehugger that cocooned ripley in the cryotube, and logically another for the one that inseminated the dog because as far as i know the facehugger can just impregnate once, after that it dies

  • @carig121 so, where is the second egg? hehe

  • @paulozerati The fact that the second egg is not shown on the screen doesn't mean it doesn't exist lol, it's only a supposition that comes to my mind when i saw the scene of the facehugger attacking the dog after having seen the scene of a human (in this case ripley) being inseminated, but my theory is only avalaible if you assume that facehuggers can only impregnate once before dying which as been proven in the previous movies, but as you know with the alien specie everything is possible lol

  • is it pursibel that the queen maked a alien put it there

  • How the egg got on the Sulaco is a MAJOR issue. The writers are essentially now saying eggs can just pop out of nowhere, for no reason whatsoever. Hence all explanation, all suspense, all study of these organisms throughout the first two movies is utterly and completely useless. It was a very, very poor move by the writers and an insult to the fans who deserved more.

  • I think bishop put the egg on the sulaco... He was too friendly to be good.

  • i hate the fact that they don't use and have any guns in this movie. i think they should have had a guy that makes makeshift guns (preferably a prisoner that used to be a yakuza).

  • The alien egg is stupid, they could have shown a facehugger creaping out of the dropship where the queen was and it would have been perfectly acceptable reason that a facehugger could have snuck on with the queen. They wanted to show the egg for the sake of showing it and no other reason which using it for teh sake of a plot device is insulting to the previous two movies.

  • incompetent, it is you. You definatelly have movie knowledge. And I am not offended, hope it wasn't me who offended you, but if so, really sorry. Cause I simply discussed about Alien franchise with person I founded smart. And you loose of our discussion track doesn't make you less intelligent (and now I'm not licking your ass if you have just thought so)

  • MetalScull, btw, I've always admired what Ridley Scott did in Alien. I'm just not a fan of anyone who counts out Aliens for being some 'inferior film', because its a sequel and because its got more action than suspense. That's what this whole thing has been about. I'm sorry I couldn't figure it out sooner. Might have saved us both the headache. lol.

  • MetalScull, OK, ok, I give up. I can't answer your question. I'm frankly getting really tired of this argument. I don't mean to offend anyone for their opinions. I'm sorry if I offended you.

    I have a lot to say and no one talk to.

    The few times I think I can talk about film, what I love about or what I think is wrong, etc, its on websites like IMDb. And they have made me feel like the biggest, most incompetent fool on the planet... for voicing my opinions, because they're not popular.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    That's ok, man, don't worry. I also respect your opinion, really do. +you really have good taste. Sometimes I meet persons, who has nothing to say except fu..k you and etc. for an argument. Glad there is somebody like you who actually knows something more than just telling bullshit. I also know that feeling of being, as you said: " biggest, most incompetent fool". I also have some original thoughts and have struggled painful results. And if there is someone who isn't

  • i dont have a problem with the egg being on the ship but rather the facehugger laying two eggs in two different hosts. they can only lay one, as soon as they do they die off, that's their purpose.

  • MetalScull, btw, I actually admire what they did with the original Saw. My only gripe is that they beat me to it.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    You still haven't answered to my questions about telling FEW thoughts which has nothing to do with my messages. That's not generilzation, my other points of views as well. Ok, you talked about the past and future to show it as an argument to show that Aliens is more important (or maybe just better??) film. But wtf are you constantly mentioning that Cameron and Aliens are brilliant and that OTHER people critises him, trashing his movies... Who cares about them? What it brings

  • big as in Alien, because it feels in most part in the movie (humour). Several people makes it, in first movies there was just liitle humour since Brett was killed shortly after begining of the movie. So I am not saying that jokes in Aliens are bad, that's not the case (again).

    And who told that I am TRASHING Frankenstein or other horror movies? Aliens brought genre in the new level, but Frankenstein still had and has the same value. It similar to Nosferatu and Lugosi's Dracula.

  • Lugosi's Dracula took vampyre genre in the new level but did Nosferatu lost it's value? No. You can tell that other movie is bad or worse compared to another film, but as itself it as good as it was before.Either way I am not trashing Frankenstein, I simply like Alien more and if you are so good at film reviews, you should know that Scott's film surely made, let's say, little revoliution in horror ganre.

  • I haven't seen some of those movies but if you're saying truth, well what can I say - another proof that Cameron is geniuos in movie making. But it seems that you are really starting to think that I argue is Cameron good director or not. And if so, you lost the way of our conversation.

  • To clinge to one inspirational horror film like Alien, while trashing the films that helped to inspire it (Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, The Thing)... it's not wise IMO.

    Cameron has recently came out with a list of his personal favorite films. The Wizard of Oz, Dr. Strangelove and 2001 are on the top of his list. If you actually look at those films together, you can actually see and feel a part of Cameron in all of them.

    I can't say the same thing for Scott, O'Bannon, etc when watching It!

  • @LukeLovesRose

    to our discussion? Are you actually trying to say that I am one of those people? Well, in this case it's real big generalization since I don't do that+even stating that Cameron is unique and great director. That is generalization.

    I guess that you are big Cameron fan who feels insulted by OTHER people who doesn't like Cameron or even insult Cameron, his works. Maybe you'll tell what's true motivation of your mentioning.

    And I said that humour in Aliens makes that horror not as

  • If people still laugh at anything Hudson says, I don't see how that could ever be bad. But, there is a generalization that it is bad... or mindless as people like to label it. If a joke isn't funny after 25 years, I don't see how that was a good joke.

    I've heard all the dialogue in Alien. I've literally taken away as much as I want to take away from that film. The images aren't breathtaking anymore. The photography is still beautiful, but it doesn't have the same impact it once did.

  • The comedy would be tame and lame, almost inexistent. Is that a good thing? In Alien, Brett and Parker are bitching about wages, all the time. That's basically all their characters amount to. They could be considered funny. Great comic relief even. However, I don't care enough about their characters to laugh when they actually do try to make a joke.

    When Hudson says something like "Yeah, man, but it's dry heat," it's actually an effective moment of comedy. Is that a bad thing? It's a movie.

  • MetalScull, everything you seem to think I'm imagining is actually some kind of generalization. Everything you are saying fits perfectly into that generalization. It's a quick judgment call that isn't solid or even realistic... and most people, most people trashing Avatar right now, they're trashing it, based on quick, unrealistic complaints.

    The only thing that sets Cameron and Scott apart and their scripts... are the shots. If Scott directed Aliens, no one would be saying about the comedy.

  • I liked both versions

  • ing to create atmosphere. In fact, he created different movie in purpose. But it wasn't such close to aspects which made first one great film.

    Aliens are great because of different aspects and thank's God itCameron did that brilliant. Couse turning tomuch from original is very risky thing which only pros can do that very good.

  • And, don't you dare say that Cameron wasn't trying to make atmosphere. Any filmmaker with half a brain wants to make atmosphere. He just added a few more layers to the layers, built by the original film, creating a film that will actually age a lot better. Hell, it's still obviously that Aliens has effected people enough that they appreciate Alien even more. But, those people don't even realize it.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    Have I EVER mentioned that Alien is NOT movie of the past? Or maybe I said somethere that Aliens is old now? So why are you mentioning those things that I actually didn't even argued about.? Why are you writing "don't you dare say that Cameron wasn't trying to make atmosphere"? Have I ever written that? You are seeing some of my thoughts, which are true only in your mind but the truth is that it's fictional. Anf if movie is "past film" it doesn't mean it's bad. It's sad that

  • nowdays film industry others us either remakes or such movies as Saw. And at least I don't see guy in a rubber suit like you do. Since AlieN is loveable even nowdays, I guess it's not such an issue. Cacoon scene was copying Scott's director's cut scene.

    About action. There was enough action to call it action movie+not only lenth is important, not only it does film action movie. And as I said, Alien wasn't the first horror, sci-fi movie but it took this genre in the new level and not because of

  • Alien's walking. It's how they remade those traditional things of horror movie genre. Otherthise reaction to the movie wouldn't be such terrifying and a lot stronger than Frankenstein.

    And yes, there was suspension, horror but it became more like human/family relationship movie+action+ another type of atmoshpere characters created. There was more humour and more different dialogue. And it concentrated more on human relationship rather those horror aspects. But it doesn't mean Cameron wasn't try

  • MetalScull, if mood makes a film for you, that's great. Yes, Alien and Alien 3 have PLENTY of atmosphere. But, the fucking truth, AlienS has a lot of great atmosphere too. When they are walking through the hive, I swear, people are either willfully ignorant or they're just not paying attention... but, I saw people cocooned on the walls, with their guts hanging out. I mean, people stuck in certain positions, dead in the worst way. How does that not set some great suspenseful atmosphere??

  • MetalScull, when the creature is walking and moving too much like a man in a rubber, the film kind of loses the suspension of disbelief... which is VITAL or so goddamn important to the sci-fi genre. You can't lose that. Because I couldn't care less about the criminal idiots in Alien 3, there was NO suspension of disbelief. So, all I saw were crummy effects, chasing really shitty characters. And the only good characters, outside of Ripley, DIED before we could even realize it.

    FUCK ALIEN 3!

  • MetalScull, watch the old classic monster movies with an open mind. They were trying to make creature features effective long before Alien came out. Even a few shots of the alien shows it walking toward Lambert... like the Frankenstein monster, a kind of stance and motion that set the bar for monster movies for a long time. Until Aliens. Until Cameron gave the monster more mobility. Now, it doesn't look like a man in a suit, lumbering toward the prey. As the alien did in that Lambert attack.

  • MetalScull, did you actually read what I wrote? Watch Aliens. Count the number of seconds or minutes of action there is, compared to moments of drama and suspense. I mean, when Ripley or the marines are walking, slowly and carefully through the hive. That's not action. In fact, they're moving slower than Ripley at the end of the first film.

    You are blinded by some love of these marines. These marines are so arrogant that they're incompetent. How can anyone put trust in them? But, we do.

  • MetalScull, whatever. I'm done. I've argued my case until I was blue in the face. I've heard everything you've been preaching. I've studied film long enough to know and understand everything you're saying. I'm bored of trying to help people understand what the future of film looks like. It doesn't look or feel like Alien. It will be closer to Aliens. That's ALL I'M TRYING TO SAY. I'm sorry, but its the truth.

    Alien will look and feel like Creature from the Black Lagoon with a better creature.

  • MetalScull, I've analyzed Alien and Aliens in every way possible. You're preaching to the choir. I'm not ignorant when it comes to filmmaking. After about the 100th, I realized why Scott did the things he did. Then, after the 200th time, all of that clever filmmaking started to feel old. It is old. Times are changing. You know the saying. Out with the old, in with the new.

  • MetalScull, I'm trying to tell you that it's because of the care and genius Cameron puts into the visual structure of the film. Something that most filmmakers SINCE Cameron have not been able to duplicate, including those "art house" films that you keep bringing up and defending for some reason. lol.

    Everyone is attacking James Cameron, because they can't understand him. That's the first and true sign of a real artist. Ridley Scott and David Fincher are good, but not that great.

  • As I was saying, MetalScull, the original reasons to watch Aliens was for the roller coaster ride. Cameron actually tapped into the psyche behind the saying, "Can we go again?" Not a lot of other filmmakers - if any - have pulled that off so freakin' well. After going on the roller coaster that is Aliens for the 100th or billionth time, you start to ask the right questions. You start to ask, "How the hell is this possible?" Why am I not getting bored, knowing exactly what's coming, every time?

  • The truck drivers in space motif is the only way we can put ourselves in this futuristic ship and situation. That's it.

    Cameron takes that realistic motif and takes it even further. He actually delves into the psyche of his central character. If you don't understand or believe, then, shut up right now. All you're doing is wasting my time if you refuse to understand the differences between Alien and Aliens.

    Yes, the inital reason to watch Aliens is for a roller coaster ride. But...

  • MetalScull, btw, just because the first movie started it all, doesn't mean that the sequel can't be a better film.

    One critic I know, actually said that AlienS is so good that it makes Alien look like prequel. That's a harsh, but awesome truth IMO.

    The alien, the creature itself and the sci-fi elements can't be the only great thing in a film. The characters in Alien are NOT GOOD characters by any means. They're truck drivers in space. That's the only way we can relate to them.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    genres. It needs different things. As I said, structure in Alien wasn't so important but if Cameron's movie structure would be the same - it would be total disaster. So I understand those differences, but BOTH did well in showing Ripley's psiche, just in different type of movies. If I'm wasting your time, simply don't anwer I don't demand continue this discussion.+ I don't know why you are telling that Cameron is brilliant and that Aliens is brilliant. I already know that and I

  • didn't write anythere that Cameron and his films, including Aliens, are bad. Cameron is genious and unique couse he can nail both action (Aliens) and drama (Titanic) movies.

    But we are talking about two different categories of films.You simply can't talk about structure as indicator to both movies. Characters? Yeah, Aliens characters are more colourful but man - the idea of Alien WAS to show seven at first sight grey characters in cruel, empty space, there they are JUST preys. During the movie

  • you could who are important, who can change that situation and all in all it was Ripley who escaped. While someone weren't too colourful (captain of the ship as well) and other were simple, not so important details in the mechanism of horror, Scott created.

  • The structure of the film is bland and boring. The setting, photography and the alien are the only things that truly stand out in the original Alien. At least, I've seen it a shit load of times, I ought to know.

    And, I wasn't talking about the older lower budgeted films, like Hitchcock made. I'm talking about every low budget film since Cameron started making high budget film, since The Abyss and T2. The Terminator and Aliens were relatively cheap, but still marvelous films compared to Alien3

  • @LukeLovesRose

    Other characters were wood, Ripley was far away from them, but it was done in purpose - to show Ripley as center of the movie, among with Alien because she was the only one who had leadership, you could clearly see her development into a fighter (like Connor in T1). Structure, on the other hand, wasn't so important, the ideas took the cake. We were talking about film MEANING btw, not the fact which movie is better. It question of taste which is better because it is different

  • MetalScull, you really need to stop living in the past. The way Aliens was made is the future of film. The fact that you can't see just how little action there is in Aliens says a lot. The fact that you can't see Alien for what it is, outside of the horribly executed sexual metaphors, that is really sad. From a filmmaking POV, Alien has the same slasher-film feel of Halloween and the best haunted house feeling in a spaceship ever... and a great monster... and THAT IS IT. The characters are wood.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    You are saying that initial reason to watch Aliens is roller coaster ride but at the same time you're telling me there is little action in the movie. Well, in this case Aliens wouldn't be one of the best sci-fi ACTION movies.

    And that "horrribly" executed sexual metaphors was one of the reasons of huge Alien success.

    Yeah, it wasn't the first horror, sci-fi movie but it took these genres in the whole new level. Characters are wood? Especially Ripley I guess. Ash, Lambert.

  • P.s. not "it doesn't matter it's not deeper but it doesn't mean it's deeper

  • 1. If Alien doesn't have children adoption thing it doesn't matter it's not deeper. Alien is more important couse it was FIRST, INTRODUCING movie without it's success you could only dream about such sequel as Cameron's. Now, reaction to first movie was sensational - people were fainting, screaming, leaving theatres with terrified faces, women were shocked - why? Because chestbursting scene had a lot o f psichoanalysis message - burst was like birth. Alien's sexuality also can bring discussions

  • MetalScull, I can pick apart and analyze and debate German expressionism or impressionism or any given moving picture art, BUT none of them satisfy me like Cameron or Kubrick or Hitchcock. They know where and how to place their art... in order to not be pretentious. In order to actually go deeper than your random "art film."

    It's probably easy to trash Cameron for being an ex-truck driver. And I've actually read, assholes, condemning Cameron for that. But, it's his showmanship... like Hitch.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    about relationship between death and sex, breeding, life and death. It can bring discussions about loneliness, suspense without no mercy or escape. People in aliens could call for help and they weren't so fucked up because of lots of ammunition.

    First movie is what Alien is all about - what Giger's, it's "Dad;s" art is all about.

    Cameron wouldn't fail if I could see that adoption thing in Alien or I could see it more clearly in Alien 3, by the way.

  • And Aliens are more like vietnamese and marines more like american soldiers in the war in Vietnam. Cameron told somethere.

    " Now, when it can't be explained by ANYONE, maybe there isn't anything there. It's just made up in the minds of certain people."

    I agree. But in this case, you simply can't underrate Alien or even Alien 3 (these movies are based on psichology in the first place). +it's danferous in action movies see more meaning then it really is, I think it's your case since you think

  • that every shot has deep meaning (unless it's quite huge hiperbole).

    And it's definatelly not as dangerous as in movies without any shoot out (already mentioned reasons). Btw, The end of Aliens is baseclly first movie's remake of ending in terms of creating atmosphere. There is only added two more characters. So again - it's a proof that first movie is the main in saga.

    I have never said that all low budget movies shows true art, deep meaning. But it doesn't mean there are no such movies.

  • Here are one perfect example of low budget movie which is really meaningful and one of the greatest movies of all time - Hitchcock's "Psycho". It's obvious, that there aren't put a lot of money. At least that's how I understand low budget movies. You, for some strange reason, don't meantion that your loveable Hichcoch was also creating low budget movies. That's what I want to say - you can't put low budget films with B type films in one category. So your thoughts about MY random "art movies"

  • are quite pointless (no offense). And I hope that you understand me and not thinking that I'm trying to proove that Cameron or Hitchcock are bad directors - definatelly not. But let's be honest - movie Aliens was created for audience desire to see blood, fights, shoot outs. Scott's horror movie probably wouldn't be as succesful if it was second part just because audience wanted more and more action.

  • MetalScull, I'm putting down the lower, "art" films, because they get a lot of praise and it's usually, from my POV, not deserved. The meaning of movies like Tree of Life, it's actually less subtle than ANYTHING in any Cameron film. I can tell Malick is trying to make me think about the meaning of certain images. In some cases, I can put it all together, before the movie is over. But, what masters like Cameron or Kubrick or Hitchcock does is a lot more complex and effective.

  • MetalScull, btw, it is blatantly obvious that Citizen Kane and Aliens are two very different films. I think I pointed that out in a previous comment. I'm not stupid or blind.

    Hell, Ellen Ripley is not the same person that Charles Foster Kane is. BUT, the techniques involved in bringing those two characters to life are staggering. By the end of Aliens, I know exactly how Ellen Ripley thought and felt, during the entire film. I really can't say the same thing for many other movies.

  • MetalScull, but, seeing as though you can't see past the action in Aliens, to see the deeper meaning of Aliens, that says a lot. Yes, you referenced the Newt and Ripley relationship. You're not too far off.

    But, look at the way the aliens almost the marine or mob mentality. That is Cameron's take on marine life. That's called a message. That's called art.

    Now, when it can't be explained by ANYONE, maybe there isn't anything there. It's just made up in the minds of certain people.

  • MetalScull, you wanna play? Let's play.

    Exactly how is a slasher film with a super cool Alien monster more important than a deeper, sci-fi / action / drama about a woman who is basically having to replace her child with an adopted daughter. It doesn't appear to be some subtle message about adoption, but I assure you, there are some powerful messages about children, born or adopted in Aliens.

    If you could see those messages as clear as the messages in Alien or Alien 3, Cameron failed.

  • No CGI? What about when the Alien's head explodes? That's definitely CGI.

  • MetalScull, what's funny is that everyone who hates on Cameron's film, have him and his work, "Unsubtle" or "Pretentious." And if you actually understand the meaning of those words, these people, bitching, have it all, BACKWARD. Unlike other filmmakers, trying to be artistic (coming off as actually pretty pretentious), Cameron's work is actually great moving art. Unlike these other, smaller budgeted "art films," Cameron's intent and art is actually far more subtle than people can fathom today.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    1. I'm not dumbass;

    2. Citizen Cane and Aliens are "a bit" different movies;

    3. Aliens are more important than ALL other alien movies? Even the first one which actually introduced us with this beast, showed the world LV-246, which was Art movie, intelligent movie in the first place? Wow, just wow.;

    4. EACH shot:D Yeah, there is deep meaning in smashing aliens head with huge marine machine;

    5. I don't hate Cameron's Aliens or any other of his movies. He is wonderful director.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    I'm only saying that it made great slasher monster into a bunch of space bugs. I and other people are ALIEN'S ITSELF fans. But it doesn't mean Cameron is pretentious or etc;

    6. You find meaning in not that "moving" art but in little things. For example we find Ripley starting to love Newt as daughter not in shoot outs. The same thing is with Titanic - other wonderful movie of James Cameron.

    7.Some of low budget movies, like first Alien, by the way, creates deep meanings

  • And you shouldn't say that low budget movies, as and art creations, are definatelly worse than Cameron's. You know why Cameron's movies are so expensive? Because of special effects and in Aliens case, that effects are created for action scenes as well.

  • P.s. Not LV- 246 but LV-426.

  • MetalScull, dumbass, it's taken film lovers over 70 years to fully understand all of the meanings to each shot in Citizen Kane.

    Until you understand that each shot in a Cameron film, means more than meets the eye, you won't get how much important and substantial Aliens is than the rest of the Alien films.

    Normal action films, like Aliens or CRANK for instance, they don't age as beautifully as Aliens has. There is good reason for that. There is good reason for the success of Avatar too.

  • In Aliens: Colonial Marines It's supposed to show how the egg got on the Ship in Alien 3.

  • Alien 3 has more meaning than Aliens, is that what you think, hithisisderek237?? LOL. What a joke!

    Seriously, just because Alien 3 is stewing in its unsubtle BS about religion, death and fate, etc., doesn't mean that its a deeper, more meaningful film than Aliens.

    Maybe the full spectrum of the meanings of Aliens hasn't even been discovered YET. Maybe there is greatness behind all of the gun play.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    Yes, Aliens has one big deep meaning - that's relationship between Ripley, Newt and Hicks. However, second movie consist of much more shoot out than Alien or Alien 3. So, there is no such big place for psichological meanings - not like Alien and Alien 3. "Maybe the full spectrum of the meanings of Aliens hasn't even been discovered YET. Maybe there is greatness behind all of the gun play."And maybe not. Especially than it's 25 years since Aliens was first shown.

  • It was a good movie on it's own but, I still wish they did the 'monks on a wooden planet' one, it had a warrior alien from the sequel hide on the ship

  • This movie is a movie you have to force yourself to like. They threw away Newt and Hicks right off the bat and delivered an Extremely Boring movie that was one of the most disappointing movie experiences of my life. After Alien and Aliens people had extremely high hopes for this movie that went out the door after the first five minutes.

  • biship snuck the egg in when he got the ship and went to pick up riply and newt.

  • If you're concerned about bad taste you probably shouldn't be watching a franchise concerned almost entirely with hideous monsters that rape you full of hellspawn and then pull your balls off.

  • Alien 3 was the scariest, in my opinion. It used unconventional camera angles and a feeling of no escape, paranoia, the fear that something could jump out and get you at anytime during the film. I think there are some moments that play with you psychologically, like when Ripely thought the steam pipe was an alien, but she was imagining it. Alien 1 and 4, didn't scare me. 2 had me on the edge of my seat when I first saw it, but lost it's intensity. But 3 still sustains tension.

  • alien 3 is ok i admit, however i still feel that the oringal script would have been sooo much better, however this is a fair review and i agree with most points.

  • Alien 3 has a 95% british cast.

  • 1 = 10/10

    2 = 9.5/10

    3 = 10/10

    4 = 8/10

  • @FranticFatality

    3 = 10/10? Aliens = 9.5/10?? You've got some mental and emotional issues, I think.

  • @LukeLovesRose

    Dude, I've got mental and emotional problems because I like a film better than the other? I preferred the 1 alien scenarios, so that is why I like Alien 3 better than the action fest Aliens. Loads of people prefer Alien 3 to Aliens actually. Go back to your action fests, fanboy.

  • Great review!

    Even with its flaws it is still a good movie, and sad.

  • don't forget the 20th century fox logo freezes to set the mood.

  • this movie is more better than AVP 1 and 2...

  • The beginning of the movie never made sense to me. How the hell did the facehugger get inside the ripley's tube, and when it was done impregnating her it should have been in the tube because it falls of and dies unless someone took it out of the tube. Oh newts tube had a crack and she drowned but ripley's had a crack and a hole and she survived plus in the first scene there one alien egg but two facehuggers?

  • Alien3 is a challenging and rather original film: You have an alien horror preying on the most despised criminals humanity has to offer. It dares to place a woman in the middle of it all, and even puts religion on the hotspot!

    It was a plagued production, but it beat all the odds due to its very talented cast and emotional scenes.

  • The way they killed off Hicks and Newt realy pissed me off!

  • @LordSnakeJake

    I know, right? Just the cheap excuse for the deaths of Newt and Hicks was OUTRAGEOUS IMO. It was just that, a cheap excuse to kill off two wonderful characters that we actually grew to care about in Aliens. It was a lame studio, executive decision, just because Sigourney wanted the spotlight, I think.

  • Alien 3 was not entirely bad. In fact, I saw it on TV when I was 14 yrs. old. It was a bit suspenseful and slightly scared me at that time. But when I watched Aliens (second movie) again, I have to admit, it was better than the third movie. They've used a giant animatronic Queen. VERY IMPRESSIVE.

    In Alien 4, H.R. Giger was no longer involved.

    Too much CGI = not scary / not realistic.

  • That Fincher quote can really change your mind. I like what he did and understood it when I saw this movie for the first time. You have to be more open to thinking starting with this film.

  • Brought on a better understanding of the third film, I always had a big hate for it, but seeing your vid made me realize some deeper meaning in the characters motives and actions. In my opinion it's the weakest of the series, 1/2,4,3 to me (1 and 2 tied) but that's just MY opinion. I admit I hate the whole Hicks & Newt thing, as they went through so much, wasn't /as/ broken up about Ripley by the end (how the dive was done cross like erked me for some reason) but anyway, good review man.

  • I liked Alien 3, except for the fact that they changed the pulse rifle sounds- UNFORGIVEABLE!!!!

  • Compared to Alien and Aliens, I find Alien 3 to be VERY BORING, even the Assembly Cut. I think it's trying too hard to make us care about murderers and rapists. I mean, there are better ways to do that than to make the audience feel like they've been raped... watching the deaths of two beloved characters in really unnecessary and contrived circumstances.

  • @MrBOPESquad2 My only hope is that Prometheus is as the magic we have been waiting for. I did read somewhere that no CGI or little is being used so perhaps there will be alot more models etc like the older movies. I hope this is the case as to 99% of creature features look fake. Movie's now are more FX then plot as i always say. Transformers a prime example of over the top FX with no plot worth thinking about. I would rather sit 3 hours watching a new ridley film with 3 actors and FEAR

  • thought it was great drama and visually stunning for its time, fuck off haters