ALIEN 3 (1992)
A Film Review
Copyright Dragan Antulov 2004
One of the most enduring cultural stereotypes describes Europeans
as art-oriented snobs who wouldn't admit liking products of popular
culture to save their lives, while Americans often get portrayed as
simple-minded consumers of popular junk, unable and unwilling to
appreciate anything that would require use of intellect or finer artistic
sensibilities. The film that most effectively illustrate this divide is
ALIEN 3, 1992 science fiction horror directed by David Fincher.
When it arrived in American cinemas, it was panned by critics and is
now almost universally hated by American fans of ALIEN series; on
this side of Big Pond, it was praised by critics as "uncompromising
work of art" and there are even many ALIEN fans who claim to
consider it the best film in the series.
Just like in previous two films, this one begins with protagonist -
space pilot Ellen Ripley (played by Sigourney Weaver) - returning
home in hibernation aboard large spaceship. Ripley has survived
encounters with the nasty race of xenomorphic homicidal aliens and
her nightmares correspond with reality - one of those creatures was
left on the ship and caused massive malfunction of all of ship's
systems. Some of the ship's services still work and Ripley, still
hibernated, is taken on emergency pod; the vehicle crashes on Fury
161, former mine colony converted into maximum security prison for
the world's worst murderers, rapists and psychopaths. Ripley, the
sole survivor of the crash, meets the prison's inept administration, led
by Andrews (played by Brian Glover), and prisoners, many them of
embracing apocalyptic Christian cult led by charismatic prisoner
Dillon (played by Charles S. Dutton). The closest thing to apocalypse
begins when it becomes apparent that one of the creatures was
brought to the planet and is ready to wreak havoc among population.
The entire prison lacks guns or any weapons to fight the unstoppable
beast, but this is only part of the problem for Ripley who is forced to
face something worse than her worst nightmares.
Reasons for ALIEN 3 being admired are in the fact that the makers of
this film tried, and for the most part succeeded, in making the third
instalment of the series as different from previous two as possible.
The setting of ALIEN 3 is decaying prison colony, almost completely
deprived of the "whiz bang" futuristic technology that was
omnipresent in ALIEN and ALIENS. The characters wear completely
different costumes, looking more like the medieval monks than brave
engineers of the future. The vast, open spaces within the colony
facilities create agoraphobic anxiety in the same way lack of space
created tension in previous two films. ALIEN 3 was first feature film
for David Fincher, young director known for his commercials and
videos; in it he displayed his artistic sensibilities creating dark,
depressing world which equally repellent and fascinating; the same
techniques would serve Fincher very well later in his career. Finally,
the basic reason why ALIEN 3 is admired is in its lack of compromise
- darkness and bleakness in this film is brought to its extreme, not
only in the film's look or atmosphere, but also in its content. The
beginning of the film defies Hollywood rules about bad things
happening to certain categories of characters, while the ending is
heretical in being complete opposite of "happy".
Being brave and uncompromising doesn't always guarantee a great
film. ALIEN 3 suffers because the bleakness in the film was less the
result of the clear artistic vision and more the result of creative crisis
that had plagued the production, resulting in endless changes in the
script. In such circumstances bleakness of the film became the only
thing that was supposed to hold various contradicting elements of
ALIEN 3 together. And that bleakness often looks like the bleakness
for the bleakness sake. The plot and characters suffer because of it.
Just like most of Hollywood films look false and unconvincing
because of the producers' desire to pin happy endings to the stories
that would work only as downers, ALIEN 3 looks false and
unconvincing because the story and characters must sacrifice
everything, including plausibility and common sense, in order to
achieve most unhappy ending possible.
At the very beginning, the script borrows cheap tricks from cliff-
hanger movie serials to give excuse for the most unimaginative
sequel possible - something that ALIENS, to the James Cameron's
great credit, didn't do in regards to ALIEN. Of all protagonists who
could battle the monster in this one, only one survives - the one who
just happens to be played by movie's co-producer Sigourney Weaver.
The character played by Weaver is much different from those in
ALIEN and ALIENS - less believable and less interesting. In previous
two films Lt. Ripley was intelligent and ingenious professional
preoccupied with saving her own and lives of people around her. In
ALIEN 3, from the very beginning she has few reasons to stay alive
and even fewer reasons to care about people around her; for most of
the film she doesn't do anything and once iconic heroine is reduced
to weak, pathetic wreck the audience can't stand on screen. Lack of
spirit in Ripley is hardly compensated with her "bold" make-over - in
ALIENS she was feminist icon, she was supposed to be poster girl
for "butch" lesbians - because the reason for that fashion statement -
planet being infested with lice - only leads to few dozen of other
protagonists - all male - having shaved heads and confusing
audience.
The characters - the very thing that made ALIEN and ALIENS great
- is probably the biggest weakness of ALIEN 3. In previous two films
the audience had opportunity to know various protagonists well,
learn of their virtues and flaws and, finally, care for them. Here the
people Ripley should fight for and care for are described as
psychopathic murderers, rapists and other sorry excuses for human
beings. Despite all of them being played by experienced British
actors, the inept script - which gives them few opportunities to show
of their characteristics - hardly anyone leaves much of impression
(with exception of those played by Charles Dance and Ralph Brown).
When alien monster start interfering in their lives, ensuing mayhem
quickly becomes predictable, repeatable and uninteresting. Although
the film features more gore than in ALIEN and ALIENS combined,
many in the audience would starts yawning because of the "deja vu"
effect. Even the ending, which features completely unnecessary
appearance by Lance Henriksen, looks unoriginal, because of its
striking resemblance to the ending of TERMINATOR 2.
Some might argue that ALIEN 3 is unjustly criticised because most of
the grievances come from those enamoured with two previous films
in the trilogy. As a standalone film, with viewers unfamiliar with
Scott's and Cameron's masterpieces, ALIEN 3 could be at least
appreciated as rare Hollywood example of breaking conventions.
Unfortunately, its connection with the series is unavoidable and the
author of this review is left with no other alternative but to side with
the people with the other side of Big Pond. ALIEN 3 is an interesting
failure, but failure nevertheless. As a fan of ALIEN series I can only
hope that creators of next ALIEN movie would learn from this
mistake.
(Note: This review was based on Director's Cut of ALIEN 3, available
on recently released Alien Tetralogy DVD collection. This version -
with some extra and some altered scenes - is visibly better than
Theatrical Release version and addresses some of the script problems,
although not in the manner that would change the general
impression of the film.)
RATING: 4/10 (+)
Review written on January 17th 2004
Dragan Antulov a.k.a. Drax
http://film.purger.com - Filmske recenzije na hrvatskom/Movie Reviews in
Croatian
http://www.ofcs.org - Online Films Critics Society
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 36821
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 1240064
X-RT-TitleID: 1039355
X-RT-AuthorID: 1307
X-RT-RatingText: 4/10
NOTE: This review was posted on the usenet
to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup.
Mooviees.com accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review.
Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.