ALIENS is a great ****ing movie.
So very true.
ALIENS is a great ****ing movie.
Now, if Alien is a masterpiece of cinema and Aliens is a great ****ing movie, how should Alien 3 be regarded? What is the most probable fairest estimation?
Been thinking a lot about this lately. The first three films are the only ones I consider canon and the more I watch them, the more I believe they are Ripley's story above all else. While I love that each of these films has its own distinct look, tone, and genre, Ripley's arc remaining believable is probably their greatest achievement. She evolves so much from the first film to the third, yet her beats make sense and Weaver does a great job selling them.
I think recent entries have lost sight of that focus. Before every one of Ridley Scott's new Alien films -- Prometheus, Covenant, and now the unnamed next chapter -- he gives an interview about how the creature is either "cooked" or needs to be made scary again. It's very clear what his focus is. Scott is a premise guy, not a character guy. Though it served him well for Alien and maybe half of Prometheus, the audience doesn't have an emotional attachment to any of those films. Cameron is the one who gave us that attachment and Fincher, well, he boldly tested it.
Scott could have explored the dynamic between Shaw and David in Covenant, but instead he kills the former off-screen and (whether he knows it or not) places the audience's future investment in David's hands. As great as Fassbender is, his android character needs compelling humans to riff off of, lest he become one-dimensional. We see it happen in Covenant; the man can only give so many speeches about "creation" before we start wondering if that's all David can do at this point.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
Been thinking a lot about this lately. The first three films are the only ones I consider canon and the more I watch them, the more I believe they are Ripley's story above all else. While I love that each of these films has its own distinct look, tone, and genre, Ripley's arc remaining believable is probably their greatest achievement. She evolves so much from the first film to the third, yet her beats make sense and Weaver does a great job selling them.
I think recent entries have lost sight of that focus. Before every one of Ridley Scott's new Alien films -- Prometheus, Covenant, and now the unnamed next chapter -- he gives an interview about how the creature is either "cooked" or needs to be made scary again. It's very clear what his focus is. Scott is a premise guy, not a character guy. Though it served him well for Alien and maybe half of Prometheus, the audience doesn't have an emotional attachment to any of those films. Cameron is the one who gave us that attachment and Fincher, well, he boldly tested it.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
Agreed on everything.
But, regarding point 2, to be fair, it really is a huge stretch of the imagination how the Queen even got onboard the dropship... I just watched Aliens again recently, and the way the scene is edited it's just impossible for the Queen to have been able to get in there. But that's fine, I just gloss over it.
Man , it goes to show you how differently people view films.....
I for one really felt all the characters in Aliens....
We had some basic knowledge of them in the ship scenes, but who would have though Gorman , the lazy incompetent leader would come around and end up sacrificing himself for one of his crew?
Bishop, the wild card, hold true to his programming....
Hudson, the panicked humor guy, goes down in a blaze of adrenaline glory.
Hicks, the common sense honorable grunt is totally incapacitated for the final showdown.
Even Newt , the pessimist without any childlike emotions , finally gives in and become a kid again when reduced by Ripley.
If any of the characters were predictable, it was Ripley and Burke.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I give Cameron a lot of respect for making that a thing. It?s very cliche now, but I remember that moment, thinking it was over, and then WHAM, the queen in there and we are into the 2nd finale....
Not a lot of films did that back then, the duel surprise ending seems like a new thing and I struggle to remember another blockbuster that did this before Aliens.....
Well, Cameron repeated himself from his Terminator ending. The end of Arnold, and the rise of the Endoskeleton finale. Cameron was really nodding to the end of the first Alien which was similar -- supposedly leaving the beast behind in the explosion but, no, it got into the ship.
The idea of the "monster" being killed and then showing up again for a finale was not a new idea though. Wasn't that a principle gag of those Michael Myers movies and Friday the 13ths, etc? Even many Bond movies seemed over once the villain died, until the villain's henchman returned for a 2nd showdown.
For you, movie traditions really did not start until the 80's though, huh?
Alien Resurrection is Dark Horse comics the movie
I doubt Cameron would have shown the queen mount the ship.
I distinctly remember at my many theater viewings , many audience members saying Bishop had an alien in his chest.....I think Cameron was trying to insinuate that in the first seconds of the shot.
It was definitely a planned second thrill ending.
I give Cameron a lot of respect for making that a thing. It?s very cliche now, but I remember that moment, thinking it was over, and then WHAM, the queen in there and we are into the 2nd finale....
Not a lot of films did that back then, the duel surprise ending seems like a new thing and I struggle to remember another blockbuster that did this before Aliens.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That wasn't very novel... the exact same thing happens in Alien.
Alien: Nostromo set to self-destruct
Aliens: Atmosphere Processor is going to explode
Alien: Ripley goes back to look for Parker and Lambert
Aliens: Ripley goes back to look for Newt
Alien: Ripley apparently dodges the alien
Aliens: Ripley apparently dodges the queen
Alien: the creature was inside the Narcissus all along
Aliens: the queen was inside the dropship all along
Alien: Ripley outsmarts it and blows it out the airlock
Aliens: Ripley outsmarts it and blows it out the airlock
There are some different story elements here and there, but the structure is exactly the same.
Not dissing on Cameron or Aliens, it's just that the double finale isn't something new and unheard of that Cameron came up with.
JAWS has spoken.
Now, if Alien is a masterpiece of cinema and Aliens is a great ****ing movie, how should Alien 3 be regarded? What is the most probable fairest estimation?
Personally I love it, I rate it right up there. The last worthy entry in the franchise. Everything afterward had truly lost the magic.
ALIEN 3 is an underrated Gem... nowhere near as great as the first 2 but a film that has found its following over the years.
I agree that is the last worthy film in the franchise.
Yes it's new. I was also surprised.
This franchise needs some compelling characters if it's to be brought back... again. And by compelling, I don't mean generic cardboard cutouts, cheesy archetypes, or Ripley clones. Sadly I don't know if writers for these things are capable of anything else.
Just reminds me of how mismanaged these movies have been under Scott. Oddly enough, the only idea I like from them (besides David) is that the "perfect organism" we all know and love was created by an android with a god complex. Kind of fitting.
Buuuuuuut it's still not canon. Sucks too much to be canon.
ALL of this is true.
Except I don't like David creating the Alien.
I like the mystery of not knowing where it came from. I was OK with the idea that perhaps it was some form of bioweapon used by the pilots. But I preferred the speculation long ago that those 'pilot' aliens discovered the eggs and were bringing them home when one got loose aboard their ship. Foreboding parallel.
Enter your email address to join: