Insulting to the Alien series

Rating: 3/10 (16 July 2001)

There are few spoilers ahead, but trust me, it won't make this film any less enjoying, because it couldn't go any lower. I can just say right now that the first two "Alien" films are at the top of GOOD sci-fi movies. They also had two talented directors(Ridley Scott and Jim Cameron) leading them. However, Alien 3 has nothing special about it. I can say right now that Sigourney Weaver is the ONLY good thing this film has.
The story and the cinematography is what frustrated me the most. First off, the movie gives no explanation to how another Alien got into Ripley's ship. Strike one. Next, we find that the other three survivors from "Aliens" die in their pods. Strike two AND three. This idiotic move was a team effort of a flashy film editor, the director, the writers, and the cheapskate producers who couldn't afford to have Michael Biehn in the film. Alien 3 is shot using orange/yellow light to make the corridors feel dark and foreboding. Wrong. It simply sickened me because all David Fincher was trying to do was mimic Cameron's clever use of blue-green light in "Aliens". One part in the movie was just so ignorant that it almost made me laugh out loud, until I realized the writers were actually serious. For the first 1/2 hour of Alien 3 a male lead role is built up rather well, and then all of the sudden, he is killed. Right then I knew that this film really blew it. Finally, I should comment on the actual Alien. I can understand that in the first 3 films all the aliens(except the queen) are only briefly shown because of lack of technological advances. In Alien 3 the beast is poorly superimposed onto the film, much like those dogs in Ghostbusters. I still prefer the body-suit aliens, cause at least then they wouldn't look so fake. That's all I have to say about that. 1-10 Overall-- 5 Direction--6 Photography--2 Acting--7 Music score--7 Visuals--6