12. Alien: ALIEN^3 was a bad movie.
Description
This article is from the Alien Movies FAQ, by Darryll Hobsonand Eelko de Vos E.W.C.deVos@TWI.TUDelft.NL with numerous contributions by others.
12. Alien: ALIEN^3 was a bad movie.
YES:
- The "course" of the movie was "unrealistically" altered to fit with the
script. ie: in the first 5 minutes of the movie, we kill off two major
characters, place alien eggs on the Sulaco and against-all-odds Ripley
is the sole survivor of the crash.
- Although an important part of the series, Newt and Hicks died for no
discernable reason. This renders all the heroism in Aliens to nothing.
- Too many similarities between "ALIEN^3" and "ALIEN":
* one alien stalks a group of weaponless people.
* trapping the alien did not work, so let's try something else.
* repair of a busted-up android.
- Depressing. Ripley's life crumbles to an inevitable fate. No happy
(or surprise) ending. No developments which cannot be foreseen.
Ripley is also out of character: she suddenly sleeps with the doctor,
something a mother who had lost two children (her own, and Newt) shortly
after each other, would not do. She is also too hardened, and does not
seem to care about anyone anymore. Even the death of the doctor is
something she does not think about anymore. She's gone too blunt in too
short a time.
- Characters are flat, undeveloped and boring. Nobody really CARES when
the alien kills one. A small test: try to name four prisoners. It shows
how much you could get 'into' the movie. (This test can also be done for
Alien, and Aliens, which usually comes up with a very different result
then Alien3.)
- No attempt is made to explain MOST questionable events (How did the eggs
get on the Sulaco? Why is the alien different?)
- Ripley is an eye-sore with her shaven head and bloodshot eye.
- "ALIEN^3" focussed on Ripley's misfortune-plagued life instead of the
alien creature (as "ALIEN" and "ALIENS" had). Also, the maternal issue
which was very much part of Alien and Aliens, is lacking completely. There
is no 'safe haven' anywhere to get some emotional rest.
- Most North American movie critics did not like "ALIEN^3".
- The emotions in Alien3 were not taken out to what they could have. Nobody
seemed to care about someone else. Therefore it was hard to care for the
characters in the movie. An example you can test for yourself is: try to
remember the characters from Alien. Then from Aliens. And last -and least?-
those from Alien^3. Most people hardly can name two or three of Alien^3.
- Alien^3 lacked humour. In Alien we had Parker with his remarks, in Aliens
we had Hudson cracking jokes. This had a very good effect on both films:
there was this character which had a fresh view on things.
NO:
- Just because a movie doesn't have a happy ending doesn't mean it's a bad
movie.
- "ALIEN^3" takes a different direction from the prior alien movies. It is
good that they didn't make an ""ALIENS" with bigger guns" as most had
expected.
- Artistic images were well defined. The Newt autopsy scene showed almost
NO graphic images, yet the audience was revolted by the vividness. The
graphic horror was not blatantly displayed on the screen, but projected
into the imagination of the audience.
Next to the superb way the story is depicted visually, the sound is also
excellent.
- Since we don't know everything about the alien species, it's not difficult
to accept that "by undisclosed means" the alien eggs got on the Sulaco and
the alien creature was physically different.
- The interleaving of the credits and the movie scenes was visually
provocative.
- Most scenes were shot from very provocing distant angles, making them very
beautiful in the eye of the artist.
- Many European critics did like "ALIEN^3".
Continue to:
My Books
