<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zBQze6nvtio" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Me too. Once I finally got over the "everyone dying" thing, I started appreciating its style and then liked it even more after seeing the Alien 3 "Assembly Cut" and finding out how much the studio gutted it.

8-9 years ago. not sure your point.

There are limits to CG.

It's Hollywood. Let her slurp down some stem cell smoothies and she'll look 35 again.

Almost everyone who's seen the assembly cut of Alien 3 has a much higher opinion of the movie because of it.

Is there anyone who likes the theatrical over the Assembly?

Maybe they'll do a Star Trek type reboot. Trying to cover up Weaver and Biehn's age at this point , not to mention recasting Newt, would come across as pretty corny. Personally, I think Blomkamp wanted to cover up 3 and 4 and the suits at Fox didn't want to acknowledge those outings were fuck ups mostly due to their (or whomever was in charge at the time's) meddling. Blomkamp isn't the one financing the movie, so he goes with what they say.

It's not perfect, however. And I like Ripley's demise in the theatrical cut much better. Also, Bishop's "I'm not a robot, dammit!" line feels very awkward and stagey. I know it exists as clarification for the audience but it is clunky at best and was wisely cut from the TC.

I'm going to have to buy the Collector's Edition of Alien 3. I've heard good things about the Assembly Cut but I thought the theatrical was just fine.

I liked the idea that Ripley could never be certain that the creator of Bishop wasn't an android himself. It made the scene more poignant. She wants to believe they can remove the alien from her without killing her, she wants to believe the offer to survive isn't coming from another Ash-type of android, she wants to believe that this time the Company would do the right and logical thing because in the end, the alternative is her life ending. The only she can trust and be sure of is that she is infected with the xenomorph.

Right here.

I think the theatrical cut is vastly superior to the assembly cut. Nothing added is really necessary and some substitutions are inferior. The theatrical cut flows together quite nicely.

For example:

The alien escaping the live dog was far more dramatic than the dead ox(?) The CGI young alien sticks wide out.

The scene with the alien trapped and released by the crazed Golic was totally pointless.

"I'm not an android, dammit!" I like the ambiguity whether Bishop II was an android or not.

Alien 3: The Assembly Cut isn't Superman II: the Richard Donner Cut-level terrible, but it can't touch the theatrical.

I do agree that the ambiguity of Bishop II is one of the better changes in the theatrical cut.

I do think the assembly cut is more interesting and fleshed out than the theatrical, and it's my preferred version of the film. However, since it's not a true director's cut, it's more of a what could have been than a truly definitive version of the film.

I'm watching it again and I fucking love so much about this movie. The production design, the cinematography, the unspoken dynamics of Fury 161, the nihilistic atmosphere of despair that pervades the whole film. It's easily the darkest of all the Alien films. However, it's still galling to see them dispatch Newt and Hicks in between opening credit title cards. Still, as much as it was criticized for being a rehash of Alien, I find that it's anything but. It has its own voice and its own story to tell.

Resurrection is fun if you think of it as a sci-fi Jeunet film. It's a terrible Alien movie though.

Agreed all on all these points. Alien 3 is a merciless film and effective in that mercilessness. The funeral scene for Hicks and Newt is brutal.

"Why are the innocent punished?"

It was so good at conveying the despair and nihilism that I think that's a also big part of what made people dislike it. But yeah, the production design is really good. I didn't like it at the time that the look was such a departure from Aliens, but it really did set it apart from the previous two films, which I think is what most directors want to achieve when working on a sequel.


I do appreciate the symmetry of ending the series like it began. It would have been a better Alien entry had it done two things.

1) The xenomorph was a step backwards. The idea that the alien takes on the shape of its host was a great idea, but the design was flawed. I didn't like that the alien seemed to have the same color tone as it's surroundings; rust brown. I would have liked to see it come off as more intelligent, something that was hinted at in Aliens ("how could they cut the lights!? They're frickin' animals!")

2)It also would have been nice if they could have added a bit more to the mythology of the aliens before closing the book on the story. Even though Alien 3 was suppose to mirror the first Alien, it was even more spartan with the information. We at least got hints of back story with regard to the alien. For whatever reason an alien pilot was hauling cargo full of xenomorph eggs. We were introduced to the the ship, the pilot, the cargo bay, the facehugger, and the lifecycle of the creatures. We didn't get much new in the third film, and none of the speculative aspects like the first one.

I was watching a review of Alien 3 that described it as a "mess". It's strange, Alien 3 has always come across to me as a coherent story expertly put together. In fact, I think it's the last good thing that ever featured the Xenomorphs.

Compare that to these "non-messes":

Alien: Resurrection
Alien vs Predator
Alien vs Predator: Requiem
Prometheus

Man, if only they made more messes like Alien 3 nowadays...

Another thing I like about Alien 3 is its explicit and often subversive sexuality. It mirrors the subversive sexuality in the design of the creature.

There's one itty-bitty scene in Alien 3 that a lot of people miss. When Ripley get shaved, she wipes the condensation off the mirror that she looks into.

Later as near the end, the "85" wipes condensation off the same mirror and looks into it. I'm not sure what that means or why that scene was put there. My guess it symbolizes 85 as someone falling into the great abyss that Ripley has fallen into. Both victims of Weyland-Yutani.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/D1o7db95gwY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think it shows him finally taking the leadership position that he was originally granted, but never took because of his own feelings of inadequacy.

I might be one of the few people who likes Alien Resurrection.

I just wish they would start a new Alien storyline. I guess to be safe BO wise they will bring back Weaver but this franchise needs a fresh new start.

The Donner Cut is not terrible! The assembly cut is quite interesting, but in the end it really can't solve the fundamental problems with the movie, and is basically just longer.

I'll revisit 3 again of these days, I haven't seen it in years.

Alien Resurrection is fine as a Jean-Pierre Jeunet film. I hated it when I first watched it. After seeing his other films (at the time, it was probably Amelie and City of Lost Children), I revisited it and could view it in a different way. Still, a strange direction to take. What did Fox expect?

I still say the best route is to make 3 and 4 a dream. In the concept drawings it's obvious that both Ripley and Hicks are a bit older than they were in Aliens, and older than they would have been in Alien 3.

People complain that the films don't move the story forward, yet they sit here and clamor for tired rehashes with safe and familiar characters.

I actually believe that the underlying story of each Alien film (excluding both AvP movies) did move the story forward. Unfortunately the politics of filmmaking got in the way of the later chapters and the stories have been eclipsed by the mangled results of studio interference and egotistical producers. You cannot look at the list of directors and argue that any of them are hacks.

Even Prometheus had valuable information for the saga ... It just got lost in an incomprehensible mess of poorly constructed characters and logic gaps. Although, I have not heard anything that would indicate that one was not the fault of the filmmakers.

I'm with Jaymole, I actually like Resurrection. It has a fantastic visual style which makes it fit -- if there is one consistency in the series it is the unique visual styles that work with each individual story. The characters are interesting and entertaining. It moves the story forward to "what happens when 'The Company' actually gets their hands on an Alien."

When people bash Resurrection, the only thing I see them point to is the hybrid/baby finale. Yes, I admit that one part sucked. Story wise it made sense, but the execution was terrible. However what else can you give me? It was still leaps and bounds above the skull**cking Prometheus did.

OK, I just thought of something that works for #5 and I would not be averse to.
If we have to bring Sigourney Weaver back, bring her back as the one thing she despises almost as much as the Aliens ... Bring her back as Ellen, not as Ripley.

I don't mind the 3rd and 4th movies, although they don't hold a candle to the first two. The only thing that bothers me is the continual shoehorning in of Sigourney Weaver. It isn't necessary to have her in every movie, and I'd be content to never see her again.