Way back in early September, I started a thread concerning Alien: Resurrection and now I have a thread concerning Alien 3, a movie that I deem to be highly underrated and perhaps unfairly maligned.

Having recently sat through the Alien Quadrilogy boxed set, I had the chance to see the director's cut of Alien 3 and I must it was a somewhat bigger improvement of a flawed classic that had a highly troubled production.

I thought the cast did a very good job, with supporting actors such as Charles S. Dutton (Dillon), Charles Dance (Dr. Clemens), Brian Glover (Intendent Andrews) and Ralph Brown ("85") being the standouts.

I thought Fincher, then a very young director, did a very good job despite the awful events and studio bickering that reportedly occurred during production.

In a lot of ways, Alien 3 seems better on repeat viewing, is in some ways more thoughtful than Aliens and head and shoulders above Alien: Resurrection.

Of course it was tough shit that Hicks and Newt were so callously killed off before the movie started, but the Alien saga is supposed to be dark gothic horror.

I don't think it sucked at all. Of the four films in the series it's the one I watch most often. I really like everything about it.

I think your question is a bit loaded to begin with. I didn't think it sucked; it was definitely different than the first two films in the series, and compared to the 4th, it is a masterpiece.

One of the reasons I don't like it is, as you mentioned, the premise. It completely invalidates Aliens. I understand why they did it (they wanted Ripley to have no reservations about choosing to die at the end), but I still don't like it. It seems cheap, almost flippant.

I think they could have gotten around that by not having Alien 3 take place immediately after Aliens. Ripley and Hicks (probably not married) would be living with Newt as a family, and somehow Ripley gets back in space. Her ship crashes on the planet (which should have remained a monastery), and everyone onboard is killed but her. The ending would have been more tragic if she didn't want to die (knowing that people that loved her were waiting for her return), but knew it was her fate.

So my main problem with it isn't the execution, but the overall premise.

Now, the fourth... that should never have been made. At least, not with Sigourney Weaver.

I like Alien 3.

BTW, why did you pick that title for your thread, when it seems clear after reading your post that you don't think the film sucks?

Most sequels will suffer in quality, especially after the bar was set so high with the first two. Alien3 (and 4 for that matter) is a classic example of the studio heads in pursuit of keeping the cash cow alive and making a release date, rather than an investment in developing a vision into a quality film. I don't think the story in 3 brings many new ideas to the franchise (although that has less to do with Fincher than the screenwriters and studio interference). In the end you get a film that's watchable and has moments, but ultimately fails to build upon the success of the previous films.

I don't think Alien 3 sucks now, but I did when I first saw it as did many other people. I think the reason so many dislike is because it basically wasn't the movie they wanted it to be, and let's be honest the approach they took after the major actioneer that was second one wasn't the best for the newfound fans of the series because of Aliens.

Hasn't this been discussed ad nauseam?

It's all Fox's fault.

Compared to the first two, Alien3 sucks badly. But it doesn't suck as bad as Alien Ressurection. The main reason they sucked compared to the first two is that the concept of each film paled in comparison to the first two.

I hated Aliens. IMO it's just another in a long line of bloated James Cameron craptapular action films. The third film brought the series back to its suspenseful and dramatic roots, albeit temporarily.

I don't think it sucked. I thought it was god-awful. Conceptually, the setting, the story, acting...The whole kitten kaboodle. The studio is probably most to blame. I'm also no fan of David Fincher's style either. Though Fight Club is pretty good. Still, Alien Resurrection managed to be even worse than 3.

James Cameron should have directed it. Should have taken place on earth too.

This topic has been discussed to death already, I've already trashed all the anti-Aliens 3 arguments in other threads, and I hate repeating myself.

why don't people do searches anymore??

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ighlight=alien

My only big problem was the Hicks thing (and to a lesser extent Newt) . If you watch the Alien 3 Special features you see its all Sigourney Weaver and her ego which effected this decision. BTW I like all 4 movies.

It sucks for the same reason THE GODFATHER 3 sucks.
The events in 3 ruin parts 1 & 2 when you watch them.

Because it was written by a committee?
Because they undid anything positive that was done in the second one mainly killing Newt and Hicks. Don't alienate the audience that made the 2nd movie so popular.

That's the biggest complaint I hear from people all time and if that's what they want to believe that's fine. Personally I think they are letting a "flippant" point preventing them from enjoying what really is a decent movie, and what should have been a nice wrap-up to the series. Then again this is one of the movies that "grew" on me. When I first saw I didn't care for it, but the more I watch it the more I like it.

Didn't suck to me; it's my personal favorite of the series and stands out the most in my eyes (maybe b/c of the controversy behind-the-scenes).

I've always thought that 2 was overrated and 3 was underrated. If 3 has a rep for "sucking" it's probably mostly the result of disappointed fans of 2 who were hoping for or expecting something else.

I thought it sucked because I thought the Aliens were coming to Earth! I remember seeing that damn trailer and being all excited about it, then it didn't come true. This was back in the day with little to no Internet, so there was little way for a kid to get info on upcoming movies. Based on the trailer, they implied the aliens were coming to earth. Boy was I disappointed when they landed in a POS planet where everybody looked the same.

I thought the theaterical version sucked, the directors cut is much better. Still the best part of the movie is the dissection of Newt - god thats a heart wrenching scene. And the part that still gives me the chills.

It was waaaaay to dark. I couldn't see half of the film. it was like playing Doom 3 in movie form.

That and the trailer really hyped it up as aliens come to earth and have an all out war. Oh that trailer was so misleading.

This seems like a bullshit excuse to hate the movie. Didn't that teaser come out like a year before the movie was released, and probably before they had a final script? And there were plenty of proper trailers that gave the plot of the movie once it was actually shot.

well, when you're expecting one thing and get another your expectations have built up a picture that no painter can make. How is it any less a reason to dislike a film than say.. you didn't like the way an actor acted in it? Everyone has a reason for likeing or disliking whatever film they happen to like or dislike. You can't really say anyone's reason is bullshit when it directly relates to the film.

Say Wedding crashers made it seem like a slap stick comedy and then what did you get, some cheesy romantic comedy for the majority of it. Not what you expected regardless of whatever random other heads up you had prior to going to the film.

Alien3 was not received by the public because it was too dark and morbid. Too many bad things happen to the characters, and there is no redemption or victory at the end. The first alien was a classic horror movie, and the second was an action blockbuster. The third was a dark tale of desperation, abandonment and betrayal.