Different is good!

Rating: Null/10 (28 January 1999)

I am constantly miffed at the lack of respect this film gets; in my opinion, it has an unsettling mood and atmosphere that supersedes its two predecessors, both of which were outstanding. But "Alien 3" shows that David Fincher, though it was his directorial debut, is a very polished filmmaker. Fury 161 is an abysmal place, one that gives a final challenge to Ellen Ripley. It is grungy and isolated, and its denizens are insipid. In other words, it is the perfect setting for the death of the "perfect organism." What "Alien 3" lacked -- at least in the eyes of those who found it to be a disappointment -- was the Cameronesque aesthetics of "Aliens" and the claustrophobic sense of terror that distinguished the original. It instead reflects its heroine, who is a prisoner much like the inhabitants of Fury, and desires not an escape but merely an end. The film's cohesion with the remainder of the trilogy has always been scrutinized, but unfairly so. It is dissimilar to "Aliens," but that film also scarcely resembles its prequel. The "Alien" trilogy, because it is so eclectic in employing the talents of three different directors, is ahead of the "Star Wars" films as my favorite three-pack; it is diverse and uneven, but it's reflective of Ripley's journey from the Nostromo all the way to the fire which engulfs her body at the end of "Alien 3." In short, "Alien 3" takes a critical beating because it did not meet expectations. Perhaps over time, people who initially found fault in it will see what a truly excellent film this really is. As for "Resurrection," well, it should have stayed on the cutting-room floor.