Nice movie on it's own; Bad Alien / Aliens sequel

Rating: 9/10 (26 October 2014)

Greetings from Lithuania.
"Alien³" (1992) has two sides. As a standalone movie it's not bad, but as a sequel to two classics, it'a a bad one. Sure, it's easy to dismiss this movie and call it bad when you compare it to two movies masterpieces. Two things that were interesting in this flick every time i watched it were surprisingly to me Charles Dance's character Clemens, and second Ellen Ripley of course. Clemens was the most interesting character in this movie.
I know that this movie have had big problems during making, especially script rewrites, and you can clearly see this, it has plot holes, and not really focused on anything. Even creature itself was a big letdown - take whatever you want scene from "Aliens" with the creature and you will see that on 18 million dollars budget (4 times smaller than Alien³) maestro J.Cameron made a multi times better looking creatures than this one, which is sometimes CGI, good at the time, but very out dated now. I saw "Aliens" and "Alien³" recently back to back in one day, and "Aliens" put "Alien³" on a shame in every possible way. Sadly "Alien³" is not comparable movie with it's precedes.
Overall, "Alien³" is not a bad film, just don't even try to compare it to "Alien" or "Aliens", and it's not a bad flick. I even voted 9/10 just for the love of this masterful franchise, which is probably my favorite ever.